Ten days after they won their second Super Bowl championship, the Seahawks announced that they are up for sale.
“The Estate of Paul G. Allen today announced it has commenced a formal sale process for the Seattle Seahawks NFL franchise, consistent with Allen’s directive to eventually sell his sports holdings and direct all Estate proceeds to philanthropy,” the team stated. “The Estate has selected investment bank Allen & Company and law firm Latham & Watkins to lead the sale process, which is estimated to continue through the 2026 off-season. NFL owners must then ratify a final purchase agreement.”
The Seahawks have enjoyed stable ownership since Allen, the co-founder of Microsoft, purchased the franchise for $200MM in 1997. Allen passed away in 2018, but the team has stayed in his family since then.
Jody Allen, Allen’s sister, has taken control over the past eight years. Rumors of a potential sale have persisted for a few years, most recently before the Super Bowl, making Wednesday’s announcement unsurprising.
Allen’s goal was for his sister to eventually sell the Seahawks and the NBA’s Portland Trail Blazers and donate the proceeds to charity. Jody Allen sold the Blazers for approximately $4.2 billion last August. The wheels are now in motion to offload the Seahawks at a significantly higher price tag.
Josh Harris bought the Commanders for a record $6.05 billion in 2023, but the Seahawks figure to blow past that number. They could cost anywhere from $9 billion to $11 billion. Recent reports indicated Jeff Bezos, owner of The Washington Post and founder of Amazon, is not expected to vie for the Seahawks. Regardless, with the NFL pushing for a Seahawks sale sooner than later, bidders will begin lining up in short order.
This is a tough day. I have no fear of the team moving. Anyone that even suggests it is looking to get traffic to help their site get more clicks. Stadium fans etc etc are all too good for someone to buy it and move it. I doubt the owners would let it be moved either.
The tough part is Paul was an awesome owner. Spent money when needed let the pros run the team for everyday decisions. Jody was the same way. She even made the tough call letting them fire Pete. Jody and Pete became good friends. She made the call to fire him and as you know they did.
I would love it if Jody could just donate a certain amount to Paul’s charities. She has enough money but will she do it? I doubt it. Not sure how much money she would have afterwards. Maybe start a group to buy the team led by her. Anyway we all knew this day was coming. Hopefully we get an owner that will continue what was started and keep this team at the top of the NFL. Not too worried about moving just don’t want a guy or group that is looking to turn a big profit over keeping the team competitive.
It is a tough day but you are right, we knew it would come some day after Paul’s death. I am not worried at all of team moving. The relocation fee would be at least 650 million and there is no way the NFL and owners would want to lose the presence in the Northwest. The Hawks have a huge market throughout the northwest.
I guess they’re all pretty full of themselves, but man, I hope it doesn’t end up in the hands of one of those “Look how big my rocket is” billionaires..
The good news is some of the worst of those guys would never open their books enough for the other owners to approve.
Let’s hope so… With the exception of the teams inherited by family, you have to jump through a lot of hoops to join that good ol boys club.
Maybe Big Al Schuster down at the local feed store will buy them. He might have to sell a cow or two to swing it though.
The sale will be interesting because if the team fetches 9 billion, there shouldnt be any more talk of taxpayers funding stadiums for an oligarchy. Let the owners collectively fund any new stadiums themselves! Its not like they really help any taxpayers in those areas anyway.
There should already be no more talk of it. It’s always been handouts for billionaires’ private businesses that don’t actually serve the taxpayers other than paying a ransom when owners threaten to move teams.
You do know when they set up the money for Lumen Field it had public money but there was a path to pay it back. They also paid off the debt years early. Plus they paid off the money owed for the Kingdome. That is right the Dome was destroyed and still owed money to taxpayers.
I also don’t understand why people think there is no benefit to the people. They employ how many people? They bring in concerts and other events. Those in turn give the businesses around them customers. There is definitely a bonus to having these stadiums in your City.
I will agree that no public money should spent on the stadiums. The only way it should use public money is if they set it up like Lumen field. I forget all the nuances in the contract but these articles have talked about some of the protections built in. The stadium could be built but after it is paid off the stadium goes to the City County State. Whoever loaned them the money. Not sure you can complain about that. Lumen Field was set up to benefit the people. Most others the owner or team take control of the stadium. That should never happen. There is a good blueprint for states to follow.
Too bad Nashville and Davidson County couldnt follow it.
The idea that stadiums are a public investment that benefits the local economy has been studied repeatedly and shown to be untrue. For one thing, unless someone is building a stadium in a place where there wasn’t already a stadium in the larger area (which is effectively never true in this era), those concerts, events, and jobs already existed. And most of the jobs created are part time, seasonal, and low paying. If there are added benefits, they’re outstripped by the cost.
But sure, a loan that’s paid back is an easier pill to swallow. There are also other ways municipalities can help these things. For example, New York reworked some of the subway lines and stations to go with the building of CitiField, which also benefited the tennis center and new projects that are underway now (not all of which are good ideas, but that’s another story). Those sorts of moves have greater benefit to cost ratio than just helping billionaires pay for fancier digs for their teams.
You can find studies to say anything. Are you really trying to argue that a billion dollar company brings no positive economic benefits to a region?
Benefits that aren’t outweighed by the costs or opportunity costs of doing something else with that money? Sure. Especially when we’re talking about handing significant amounts of taxpayer money to companies that are already in the region doing the very same business.
Lumen Field was completely paid off in 2021. The final payment put to rest the $300M in bonds that were issued in 1999. Paul Allen contributed the other $130M personally to build the stadium. This budget cycle (’25-’26), Seattle alone has $350M earmarked for homeless programs. Tell me more about opportunity costs!!!
Yes, Chester.. and those are the same “studies” they’ve boondoggled one city after another with for years. No NFL stadium should ever be publicly funded. Nashville, where I live, has swallowed their line of BS not once, but twice now. Unbelievable.
Lumen Field is completely paid off now, as is T-Mobile Park here in Seattle. Both are beautiful stadiums that provide sites for far more events than ballgames. Both were absolute homeruns in terms of public funding for stadiums, as both were paid off ahead of schedule. And all the while we had people complaining about stadiums they never paid for as “taxpayer” gifts to billionaires. It actually shows your bias far more than anything else.
To be clear, I was never referring specifically to Seattle. I’m talking about taxpayer subsidies. If Seattle got theirs fully paid back and then some, great. That’s not typical.
The Mariners stadium was fully taxpayer funded… people complained about money going to billionaires. The stadium was actually funded thru a hotel tax, user fees, and the lease agreement with the Mariners. So unless you were a tourist or went to a M’s game, you didn’t pay anything. King County owns the stadium which provides many other events like concerts, WrestleMania, home/boat/golf shows, etc.
Seattle isn’t the only city to ever do it right… twice. You’re just buying into a terrible bias.
That’s because there is no benefit. I studied this in a Sports Economics class, the only franchise that it is actually benefitting their fans is the Minnesota Vikings and it’s only due to civic pride, not monetary.
You can point to businesses and restaurants gaining around the stadium, but that is taking business away from other places in the cities where the stadium is located.
You’d have to assume all those people eating at restaurants near the stadium would’ve gone out to eat regardless. Which is a huge assumption. Why do anything ever then? If you go out to eat your taking away from the grocery stores!
The idea that people would’ve been dining out in the city regardless is a ridiculous claim.
In Philly alone, the whole city was pretty dead and just 9-5 go to the office and drive home when the Linc opened in 2003 let alone during the years of the Vet. Then you have a city like Detroit. Who do you think was spending time in the city before Ford Field was built?
Those studies are complete nonsense.
You’re leaving out the part where those games were already happening somewhere in larger area.
They sure were. They were happening in the middle of a parking lot in Pontiac. How many people do you think stayed anywhere near Pontiac after to go to a restaurant or some other place nearby the stadium after the game? Very few, I’d wager.
Now compare it to people coming to Ford Field or Comerica or the new Pistons arena. Those people are going to restaurants before or after or going to bars in the city because they’re already there to go to a game or because going to the games made them see how much there is to do in whatever city it is.
That’s the difference a stadium or arena makes in a city that people otherwise avoid.
Talk about good timing. Just won a Super Bowl, good team, coaches and fans. This team will not be going anywhere. Seattle deserves to have a team especially this team.
Not just Seattle but they are really a Northwest region team. Fan base is huge throughout the entire Northwest.
Washington state, Oregon, Alaska, northern and southwestern Idaho, most of Montana. Not to mention B.C. and Alberta in western Canada.
Excellent point here.
There’s way to may incompetent owners in the league that have their hands dirty on how they want the franchise to run and eventually they turn into dumpster fires. Look at the Browns and Jets just to name a few. I hope the next Seahawks owner is not a middling one
Let’s hope the biggest bid doesn’t come from an out of town investment group. Places such as San Antonio, Memphis and Sacramento would love the lure the NFL.
This ain’t the time for Sportsball Franchise Roulette. San Antonio would undercut Dallas and Houston. Memphis would undercut Nashville (where the Titans are getting a new government-funded sportsball palace). Sacramento is faithful to the 49ers.
Out of your list, only San Antonio is big enough or separated enough from an existing franchise to actually support the NFL, and that’s not even a given.
I realize there will be transaction costs and that Paul Allen’s directive may have prohibited it from happening, but I wish that the Seahawks could have been donated to a nonprofit formed for the sole purpose of operating the team in Seattle for the public good.
Green Bay has its shareholders. Would have been interesting to see a nonprofit trust could have been set up to perpetually tie the Seahawks to Seattle and run the team for the public good.
Can’t. The NFL outlawed that in the 1960s. Green Bay was grandfathered in.
Time to throw my hat in the ring to acquire the Seahawks
I have a few dollars of spare change in my sofa, maybe we could be partners.
We could start a gofund me together.
There is a Movement Calling for Public Ownership of The Hawks, much like the One with The Packers in Green Bay. Might be interesting to see if it gains any Traction.
Current NFL ownership rules (outlined in the league’s constitution and bylaws) are much stricter and were designed to prevent exactly this kind of diffuse, public/nonprofit model:
– A controlling owner must hold at least 30% of the franchise.
– Teams are limited to a small number of owners (no more than about 25 in recent policies, with restrictions tightened over time).
– The league prohibits charitable organizations, non-profit corporations, governments, religious groups, and similar entities from owning teams.
– Corporations (especially large or publicly traded ones) face heavy restrictions, as the preference is for individual or small-group “gentleman” owners who can be held accountable.
The Packers are explicitly exempt under a grandfather clause—their structure predates modern rules (banned public ownership around 1960, with further restrictions in the 1980s and beyond). The league has approved stock offerings for the Packers (e.g., in 1997, 2011, 2022) but only as exceptions to keep the status quo.
No new team could adopt this model without a major rule change requiring approval from the league’s owners (three-fourths vote for major changes like expansion or membership). There’s no indication the NFL wants to allow it—recent updates (like 2024 rules permitting private equity firms to buy up to 10% minority stakes) move toward more institutional/wealthy investment, not broader fan ownership.
Thanks for Clarifying that. I believed that to be the case, but was not certain as to the Terms of the Current Rules.
I’d rather own a Jimi Hendrix guitar than the Seahawks but it’s not something I’ll fret about.
If you’re the joker, I wonder who’s the thief…