The Spanos Family Trust, Private Equity, and the Future of the Los Angeles Chargers: Legal, Financial, and Relocation Issues
Spanos Family Purchase of the Chargers
The modern history of the Los Angeles Chargers is inextricably entwined with the Spanos family. In 1984, construction magnate Alex Spanos purchased a 60% controlling interest in the then-San Diego Chargers for a reported $48–70 million, with the transaction representing a move to stabilize the franchise’s finances and leadership after the tenure of founder Eugene Klein. Over the ensuing decade, Spanos increased the family’s holdings to 97% of the team, building not only value but also a deeply rooted family enterprise running “from rags to riches” as a “family-run business” (Jason Reid, From Rags to Riches: Alex Spanos Built Chargers as Family-Run Business, ESPN (Oct. 13, 2018), https://www.espn.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/284297/from-rags-to-riches-alex-spanos-built-chargers-as-family-run-business.
The Spanos Family Trust
After the passing of Alex and his wife Faye in 2018, ownership of the franchise was primarily held through the Alex and Faye Spanos Family Trust. The Trust’s principal asset was a 100% ownership of Chargers Enterprises, LLC, which in turn owned 36% of Chargers Football Company, LLC (the legal entity controlling the team). The Trust structure contemplated care for the Spanos children (Dea, Dean, Alexis, and Michael) and grandchildren, as well as significant charitable giving. However, financial disclosures in probate litigation revealed that by 2020, the Trust’s debts and obligations exceeded $353 million, with annual disbursements outpacing income by approximately $11 million—a shortfall “plugged” only by serial borrowings and pledges. The Trust’s illiquidity and pool of liabilities were detailed in Dea Spanos Berberian’s probate petition, including $164 million in team-specific debt, $75 million in estate tax liabilities, and over $22 million in charitable pledges (Petition by Dea Spanos Berberian [“Petition”]).
The petition described how these challenges put the Trust, and thus the team, at risk of creditor default and threatened the long-term philanthropic legacy of Alex and Faye Spanos (id.).
Resolution of Dea Spanos Berberian’s Lawsuit
Against this backdrop, Dea Spanos Berberian, a co-trustee, filed a petition in probate court in April 2021, seeking to compel her brother and co-trustee Dean Spanos to sell the Trust’s interest in the Chargers. The suit alleged that Dean’s refusal to consider a sale, and preference for ongoing borrowing, jeopardized not only the Trust’s stability but also violated the fiduciary obligations owed to the beneficiaries and charities (Petition). The petition cited statutory duties imposed by California Probate Code §§16000, 16002, 16013, and §17200, and highlighted the extraordinary leverage held by a “trophy asset” like an NFL franchise in “solving all the Trust’s problems” (id.).
After more than two years of legal and business wrangling—much of it in the public eye—a negotiated settlement was reached in 2024. Dea agreed to sell her ownership stake (combining her share of the trust and team) to an outside investor. This resolution unlocked liquidity for the trust and concluded her litigation (Sam Farmer, Pistons Owner to Buy Chargers Stake, Ending Spanos Family Dispute, L.A. Times (Sept. 27, 2024), https://www.latimes.com/sports/chargers/story/2024-09-27/pistons-owner-buy-27-percent-chargers-spanos-family-dispute).
NFL Opens the Door to Private Equity
Almost simultaneously, the NFL made a landmark decision to relax its long-standing prohibition on institutional ownership. On August 27, 2024, league owners voted to allow designated, vetted private equity groups to purchase up to 10% of any team, provided each stake represents at least 3% and must be held for a minimum of six years. These funds are limited to a maximum of six teams each, and sovereign wealth and pension funds remain barred from direct ownership. The first four permitted private equity groups included Arctos Partners, Ares Management, Sixth Street, and a consortium featuring Carlyle and Dynasty Equity.
Arctos Partners Acquisition
In May 2025, the Chargers became one of the first NFL teams to take advantage of the new policy. The league approved the sale of an 8% minority stake in the Chargers to Arctos Partners, a private investment firm already holding a 10% stake in the Buffalo Bills and minority positions in numerous other elite sports franchises. Like previous minority sales, Arctos’ role is solely as a passive, non-voting partner. The Spanos family continues to hold about 61% of the Chargers, and Tom Gores holds 27%.
Ownership Breakdown of Chargers
Spanos Family: Holds approximately 61% of the team. The Spanos family—primarily Dean Spanos, along with Alexis and Michael—retains majority control and management authority.
Tom Gores (Detroit Pistons owner): Owns 27%. This stake was acquired in 2024 and consists of the former ownership shares held by Dea Spanos Berberian and small portions (about 1% each) sold by the three other Spanos siblings. This is a non-controlling, non-management stake.
Arctos Partners (Private Equity): Holds 8%. This private equity stake was purchased in 2025 and is passive, with no management or control rights.
Other Legacy Owners: Approximately 4%. These are small stakes retained from early franchise investors and have no influence on management or direction.
Likelihood of Chargers Returning Under Control of the Spanos Family
The prospect of the Chargers returning to San Diego with the Spanos family still in control is exceedingly unlikely. Several critical obstacles stand in the way:
Financial and Legal Barriers: The Spanos family is deeply enmeshed in SoFi Stadium lease obligations and the NFL’s relocation fee structure, both of which are designed to tie teams to Los Angeles for at least two decades. Breaking those contracts and relocating would involve enormous financial penalties, legal battles, and require the family to secure funding for a new NFL-standard stadium in San Diego—a project costing upwards of $1–2 billion. Given that the family’s trust only recently required a liquidity event to resolve debts and estate issues, it is unrealistic to expect them to finance such a move.
NFL Approval and Precedent: Any franchise relocation requires not only a compelling case (e.g., stadium unviability, exhausted local efforts) but a three-fourths majority vote from league owners. There is little evidence the NFL would endorse moving the Chargers out of the lucrative L.A. market back to San Diego, especially given the current contracts and league expansion interests.
Stance of Spanos Leadership: Public statements from Dean Spanos and family have made it clear: the move to Los Angeles is “irreversible.” Local and league signals have consistently pointed toward remaining in L.A., regardless of periodic nostalgia or short-term returns to San Diego for promotional events.
So, under current family ownership, a full-scale move back to San Diego is practically impossible in the next decade and beyond.
Likelihood of Chargers Returning Under Control of New Ownership
A new owner—especially one with enormous wealth and vision—changes the calculus somewhat:
Fresh Political and Community Engagement: Billionaire owners can approach San Diego and its leaders with a “clean slate,” offering to privately finance a new stadium or fund public infrastructure in a way the Spanos family never could. This would likely make local and possibly state officials more receptive to the idea of bringing the Chargers back.
NFL Influence and International Prospects: An owner such as Jeff Bezos (who Dea Spanos Berberian mentioned explicitly in her petition as a potential buyer), with immense financial resources and international relationships, might sway other owners or NFL executives, especially as the league eyes global expansion. Billionaires can better weather the costs and lobbying needed to clear relocation hurdles, and might even be seen as partners in growing the NFL brand both domestically and abroad.
Not Guaranteed, But a Real Possibility: Even with all the above, relocation would not be certain—new owners could have other priorities, such as keeping the team in L.A. for brand value or exploring entirely new markets, possibly even internationally. However, the likelihood of return increases significantly with a new owner willing to build a state-of-the-art venue and win the NFL’s approval.
So, while still facing league hurdles, a billionaire owner with strategic vision and deep pockets—such as Jeff Bezos—could revive the possibility of the Chargers returning as a San Diego-based franchise, or alternatively, might move the team in a completely new direction, including international relocation. The future under new ownership holds more possibilities, but by no means any guarantees.
Conclusion
In summary, the story of the Chargers under Spanos family stewardship reflects the complex intersection of tradition, business realities, and evolving league policy. While the team’s roots in San Diego remain emotionally powerful, the contractual, economic, and political barriers to a return are nearly insurmountable under the current ownership. With the arrival of new investors—and the NFL’s incremental embrace of institutional capital—there are now more theoretical pathways for change, but all are contingent on the priorities and motivations of future stakeholders. Thus, while the possibility of the Chargers’ return to San Diego may never be fully extinguished, for now it exists more as a hope than an imminent likelihood, shaped by forces far beyond nostalgia alone.
