Today there was both new and old news about the Cincinnati Reds and their ownership. Back in the summer of 2024 Phil Castellini was named as team president and CEO. Bob Castellini, Phil’s father, remained in charge as the principal owner and managing partner. Over the winter, according to Rob Manfred at a press conference on Thursday, the controlling ownership of the Reds was approved with Phil Castellini taking over for Bob Castellini. This was first reported by the Associated Press.
What all of it means isn’t entirely clear. When the initial move was announced in 2024 the Reds statement noted the following:
President and Chief Operating Officer Phil Castellini has been promoted to President and Chief Executive Officer; Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Doug Healy has been promoted to Chief Operating Officer /Chief Financial Officer.
With these moves, Bob Castellini retains control and managerial responsibility over all business and baseball operations; Phil Castellini, Doug Healy and President of Baseball Operations Nick Krall will continue to report to Mr. Castellini.
The Cincinnati Reds statement noted that Bob Castellini was still in charge and the move at the time sounded much more like people just getting fancy new titles that gave them raises. Charlie Goldsmith of Fox 19 got a statement from the team in Goodyear saying this on Thursday night:
That was part of MLB protocols associated with the organizational changes the Reds announced in July of 2024 naming Phil president and CEO, and Doug Healy as COO and CFO.
There seems to be some slight disconnect between the two statements here. Two years ago the Reds were saying that Bob Castellini was still in charge and that Phil and everyone else was still reporting to him. The media guide that was released last season has Bob listed as the principal owner and managing partner. He is the first person in the media guide, followed by W. Joseph Williams Jr. (chairman/owner) and Thomas L. Williams (vice chairman/owner) before we get to Phil Castellini as the president and CEO.
Today Major League Baseball told the world that Phil Castellini is now viewed by them as the controlling owner of the Cincinnati Reds, taking over from his father. But the Reds say that this is the same news from 2024 but that it was just approved through the voting protocols of Major League Baseball.
So the question here is which is it? Is Phil Castellini the owner of the Reds now, or is Bob? And if it’s not Bob and it is Phil, is he still reporting to Bob as was stated by the team in July of 2024 when they made this move to promote Phil to the position of president and CEO? Would the man named “controlling owner” report to someone else in the organization? That seems a bit strange.
Someone in the Castellini family is still in charge at the very top of the organization. Whether it’s Bob or his son Phil seems to be a little confusing based on what the team has said over the last two years. It would not be surprising if the younger of the Castellini’s has indeed taken over. Bob is 84-years-old and while there’s no news about his health or condition, that’s also an age in which most people are through with working. Even people who are very, very rich and hold “office jobs”.
When Terry Francona was announced as the manager last year, Bob was there to hand him his jersey.
https://www.mlb.com/reds/video/reds-introduce-terry-francona-as-new-manager-138459
He shows up at about 1:10 in, and only hangs around for about a minute before exiting stage left. In that very brief time we see him, he does not look “all there” and it seems by the way others treat him that they know this.
All this is to say, this was a year ago, and it already looked like Bob was mostly just a figurehead at that point. I would not be surprised if Bob has further deteriorated over the past year to the point that they simply need to announce that the younger Castellini is now the point of contact for all things business related to the Reds, up to and including ownership.
Actually, I should correct myself and say that this was MORE than a year ago, in October of 2024, so about a year and a half.
That’s even more time for Bob to have mentally declined.
Bob has always had his cronies, mostly ones from the Cardinals Org. Hopefully Phil won’t. Enough said.
Ah, as almost always, looking to NHL may provide insight. Each team in the NHL has a designated “Governor” who speaks officially for the team at league meetings and is empowered to cast the team’s vote on issues.
So, I read this lastest Reds announcement to indicate Son Phil has been accepted by MLB to fill this official role for the Reds in relation to MLB. Matters.
Whatever discussions or decisions may happen in private family councils, what Phil says in public is the word and policy of the team.
I suspect that since MLB accepted or approved this move, it is irrevocable by the Reds organisation or anyone in/ representing the Castellini family without the approval of MLB.
Yep, I believe you have explained the situation very well. I’m just not sure why it took so long unless Bob C. and the other owners wanted a bit of a trial run before Phil C. became the final word for the franchise. It will be interesting to see if the Castellinis maintain their share of the team after Bob C. passes away, as death often prompts ownership changes.
If it was a trial period (my word would be probationary), i’d make a beeline straight to Phil’s ‘Where ya gonna go?’ fiasco.
@Dave, when you’re the owner’s son, a ginormous PR gaff doesn’t end your organizational tenure. However, his giant unforced miscue had to give some of the other franchise owners, and some of the other Red’s owners pause.
Bob was undoubtedly gifting incremental units of ownership to Phil and family over the years. With the federal estate tax exemption going up to $15M ($30M if Bob is married), that probably allowed him to increase his gifting to get Phil into the majority position. They were also waiting on valuations and valuation discounted for the Reds as a company.
It’s been pretty obvious Phil has been in charge for a while now. Pretty much since the whole “where you gonna go” fiasco, they just kept him out of the limelight because that was absolutely atrocious PR. That was them starting to get him out front and in one of his first instances it went hilariously awful.
obviously, a well earned promotion 😉
Meet the new boss same as the old boss.
Was coming here to say the same thing
But we won’t get fooled again, right?
All we can hope, and it’s likely a fantasy, is that Phil wants to be more successful than his dad. My guess is that Phil is cheaper than Bob, if that’s even possible. I hope they sell out. I don’t care if they move the team as long as new owners actually care about winning.
I don’t care if they move the team? WTH? Some fan you are
I’m a fan of the team not the location. If a buyer were to surface and want to keep them in Cincinnati, all good. But I’d readily give that up to be free of the Castellini mediocrity and with a winner. And obviously, I don’t live in Cincinnati and rely on the web and media. It would likely be different if I did live there.
Sell the team Phil.
To quote Phil, “Be careful what you wish for.” Between the lines, no loyalty to Cincinnati. It is just business and my team.
Best wishes, Phil, for a long and successful tenure at the helm.
The good news is that as a mid 30’s adult I am confident his years at the top can only be better than his father’s. Unfortunately that bar is not hard to surpass. Even the few successful years from 2010-2013 are a way distant memory at this point.
“It’s not personal, it’s just business” – Michael Corleone “The Godfather”
So now, Phil Castellini is the Reds’ Godfather. Well, how lucky we all are. I think that means that there is absolutely no chance of Dick Williams (the younger) coming back. As many mistakes as he made, I think he also was trying to put together a team that could win, as much as it ended up back-firing, and with unlucky coincidence of the lost Covid year (2020).
“It’s been pretty obvious Phil has been in charge for a while now. Pretty much since the whole “where you gonna go” fiasco, they just kept him out of the limelight because that was absolutely atrocious PR. That was them starting to get him out front and in one of his first instances it went hilariously awful.” – The Duke
Yeah, this, very much so.
Bob doesn’t look to be in the greatest health so this isn’t surprising. I think they are just making it official that its Phil’s time now. Yippee.
In other news, here’s a link to a good article on what’s to come . https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/47620464/mlb-2026-kyle-tucker-los-angeles-dodgers-free-agency-labor-cba-offseason
“Phil,” isn’t he that groundhog in Puxatawney, PA?
He is, and even though he is a bad predictor of weather, he’s certainly the oldest groundhog in history.
To quote Phil, “Be careful what you wish for.” Between the lines, no loyalty to Cincinnati. It is just business and my team.
Where ya gonna go?
After the lockout, most likely Nashville. Phil will be worse than Bob ever was.
Bob was just Phil with better PR, and always was.
Not sure it will be much of a change given his previous comments (“where are they going to go”) but lets hope.
Maybe we can also get Mike Brown to give up control of Bengals to his daughter as well
I’m just a weary old goober but if a new owner moved the team it would be more likely for money and a brand spanking new stadium with all the bells and whistles than a goal of winning.
I’d rather have Phil Collins as the Phil C. running the Reds. No surprise that he’s taking over since we all knew it was going to happen one day.
Unlike most here, I don’t have a problem with the Castellinis as controlling owners of the Reds.
They spend more than the Pirates, and the Geno/Candelario/Moose/Castellanos/Martinez/Pagan acquisitions show they will at least spend some money on FAs. Maybe it’s not as much as fans hope, but they do at least spend.
The big extensions for Votto and Homer Bailey are further evidence of them willing to spend.
As Phil inappropriately said once, be careful what you wish for. Although he said that in a different light, as fans we should be careful what we wish for. A change in ownership might not be a change for the better.
+1,000,000
Well I don’t 100% disagree with you that we could have worse ownership, it’s also as plausible that we have better ownership. There will be financial constraints no matter the owner, but how those constrains are viewed, and grappled with could make all of the difference.
I think there are fair reasons to criticize the Castellini-led ownership group. However, spending is not very high among the reasons. MLB is broken. If it’s not fixed, Cincinnati is not a viable franchise location long-term if winning a championship is the goal. That said, there’s a pretty clear path to resolving MLB’s competitive issues. It starts with the CBA and will culminate with the 2028 TV deals.
It’s not like there are voluminous large markets that can support teams with Dodger like payroll. Moving teams is just shuffling the problem around. Competitive balance needs to be figured out or MLB risks losing large chunks of their fanbase.
There’s a chart going around X that shows the payroll ranking of the teams who
won the WS each year since 2000. It’s very clear, which the exception of one outlier, that any team outside the top 15 has no chance, outside the top 10 has almost no chance, and the most likely outcome is that a team in the top three in spending will win.
The Reds franchise has zero chance to get to the top 3 and would be bankrupt very quickly if it attempted to get into the top 10.
Adding $30M in payroll doesn’t really make much difference, frankly. The Reds would need to add $50M to get into the top 15. They would need to add $110M to get to the top 10. They’d have to spend more than their total revenue to get to the top
3.
I’m not going to say it’s impossible but I can’t see how it’s possible with the current Cincinnati market and the current CBA.
Any complaining we do that doesn’t account for this reality is tilting at windmills.
@Duke, I agree, but a team in Nashville or Charlotte would have a better chance. The Reds are going nowhere until after 2037, so I hope MLB gets on a better path.
“aT LeaST wE CaN go tO a GaME”
Rallying cry of Cincy sports casuals. I’m not sure why most seem happy at the prospect of having a mediocre team that will stick around.
It’s been 30+ years since this team made a dent in the playoffs. Demand better. New ownership would be a welcome change. Even with the chance that the team moves, it would be better than Phil C in charge.
I can go to a game. The Dragons game. I’ll spend a fifth of the money, have a better time, sit closer, and likely have more fun.
Comparing the Castellinis to owners who spend even less than the Reds does not make me feel any better. Since the Castellinis took over in 2006 Castellini pledged a hands-on approach rebuilding the team to competitive, championship status. Since then the team reached the playoffs in 2010, 2012, 2013, 2020 and 2025 we have not won a series or a single postseason game. The Cincinnati Reds have a record of 1497-1641 since 2006. The players you mentioned the Reds obtained were just enough to placate the faithful from time to time. As far as I can tell this ownership is simply built to keep the it’s owners in a steady predictable profit margin year after year and that’s it. So I will continue to hope for new, better ownership one that has enough money to be both seriously competitive with a burning desire to win along with making a profit.
The Reds won the first two games in the NL playoffs against the San Francisco Giants in 2012 at SF. Then lost the next three at home.
SF went to the World Series and won it.
WE WUZ ROBBED!
Interesting article at The Athletic (paywall), regarding how things might look in MLB with a salary cap/floor.
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7040560/2026/02/12/mlb-salary-cap-impacts-explained/
And another take from Jeff Passan at ESPN:
https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/47620464/mlb-2026-kyle-tucker-los-angeles-dodgers-free-agency-labor-cba-offseason
This is a must read. I thought I wanted a salary cap, but realize it may not result in more equatable results. If the cap and floor remain, far, far apart. The rich teams will still spend on the best players while teams on the floor may still pinch pennies- relatively speaking. The only thing it may help with is the perception of leveling the playing field and I am sure owners may like not having to spend like the Dodgers to compete, especially if it increases the value of their corporations. I don’t think it will hurt the players much if the cap and floor totals equal the same percentage of revenue currently spent on salaries. In other words take a little off the top and add the same to the bottom. It may even help the players by giving them more options on where they want to play for the same payday.
From the article.
Then there’s roster churn to fit the cap. In the NFL, free agency pushes players who are already under contract out the door.
“Every free-agent period, it’s blood in locker rooms as they cut players,” Meyer said.
Nathaniel Lowe on a minor league contract with ST invite
Yes!!!’ I have been rooting for this signing all winter. Thanks RFFL!!
That is a pretty great signing. Only 30, a career .771 OPS over 3430 PA. I’m guessing this means that CES is going to be out quite a while and if the 1B or DH spots open up and he’s producing, he could get a shot. I hope that doesn’t happen, because that would mean either Geno or Sal are injured, but it’s good depth. We’ve gone into years less secure on the MLB roster for 1B than Louisville is this year.
Can’t really see Lowe at AAA, though. Seems like, if he sticks, he’ll be a platoon 1B/DH in the majors.
Nathaniel Lowe could also join the big league team if Ke’Bryan Hayes misses time due to back issues.
Very nice pick up by Nick Krall.
He signed a minor league deal. Unless he has an opt out, I’m not sure how much of a choice he has in the matter.
The minor league deal doesn’t mean much in a case like this. It’s more a mechanism to get him in camp and a pathway to a job.
Sal Stewart just went “Huh?”
Lowe is just one year removed from a 2.7 WAR, 123 OPS+ season, so I can see the utility of it.
Plate appearances are getting thinner for less established players, though.
After Schwarber fell thru, my hope was the Reds would sign Miguel Andujar (I didn’t think they could afford Geno) and Nathaniel Lowe.
So, I am completely thrilled that they have signed Suarez and Lowe. Well done Nick Krall.
I agree, Lowe is an outstanding player to bring in on a minor league contract. If he bounces back, the team is better. Another player with an OPS+ of 120 would do wonders for our lineup.
I have followed the Reds for 56 years. I know many here have followed them for ever longer. I have no children or grandchildren who are Red’s fans. It may be selfish, but I will happily run the risk of the Reds leaving town in order to have a chance at a more dedicated ownership group.
I think the threat to move the Reds is a scare tactic. The team drew more than 2 million fans last year. I don’t see MLB approving a move even if an owner wanted to.
There is of course a chance that I am wrong and the team would move to Nashville or someplace. But MLB has been struggling for over a decade to move the A’s. I just don’t see the Reds moving in my lifetime. I really don’t.
As I said I am old. If my choice is seeing this team with a real chance to win a championship, even if it opens the possibility of the team relocating in the future I am willing to take that chance.
The truth is though, any positive changes in ownership or the new CBA will probably come too late for most of us.
Ugh. Would much rather the Reds owners bottom line be winning rather than their apparent bottom line of how much money can we make. I am not against seeing a team in Nashville, but I would much rather see a winning team.
The ownership, being who they are, has a right to expect to make money on their team. This is not a publicly held franchise (like the Greenbay Packers, for instance).
And I don’t know how much they make, or if they have lost money some years (likely they did in 2020). As most businesses, they probably operate on a revolving credit line, which they must pay interest on when income falls below expected numbers, as they have little income in the off season, and not much when the team is on the road (TV money?). I doubt the minor league affiliates make a profit, so that is another carrying cost.
All in all, the Reds ownership is not “turrible”, as Charles Barkley might say, but it is disappointing to us Fans, as they promises that Bob Castellini maden in 2007 or whenever have rung pretty hollow in the ensuing years. A lot of bad decision in the C Suite, from my point of view. Poor player management, evaluation, free agent signing and contracts, and on and on. And do you remember Eric Milton? Now THAT was a bad signing. About as bad as Jeimer Candalario…..maybe?
Personally, I think it’s time for me to bury the hatchet about Phil being in ownership of my team. He made a very bad judgement and has paid quite a steep price in public relations.
He seems to care about the Reds and we need to remember he represents a very large ownership group.
The Castellinis stepped up this off season and brought in some good players – and spent much more $ than I thought they would. They also hired a very credible manager.
Our ownership got crushed financially by the Covid year and is still not making the $ they planned on when they signed the cable tv deal years ago.
I am going to start getting past the infamous “where you gonna go” interview. I hope they keep the Reds in Cincinnati but if fans don’t start attending more to get us closer to the brewers attendance then all bets are probably off.
I expect the MLB announcement is very much an after the fact formality, but required league (I.e.) the other owners approval. Im much more interested. In the remaining share holders status, which I don’t believe is a required public disclosure. There are a number of shares (11, 13, 17 – anyone know) and the controlling owner historically has held more than the other owners.
All of which is to question if the Williams brothers, and Dick, retain their shares and titles; and if any of the other owners have changed status.
The Castellini family own just 12%- 15% of the equity shares. However, their holdings include a designated managing partner “super share”. Along with the believed combined Williams brothers’ shares, the Castellini/ Williams holdings are believed to comprise a critical mass which can block any move to dismantle the managing partner agreement, even though that critical mass is less than an outright majority.
Lindner had a similar set up but agreed to be bought out by Castellini.
It seems to me that it is financially possible for the reds to spend more money on the roster. But at the same time, it is really easy to spend someone else’s money.