Future Campus Framework Presentation...

[Townie72]

Same reason a company would pay for naming rights or billboards/ribbon boards, etc.. Exposure. Brand recognition. I have no idea what you are talking about regarding "channel mark-ups". SU would not "buy" it. The idea is that Trane would give it to SU (installed) in return for marketing exposure (e.g. "Trane Field" ). I am sure contractors would be fine since Trane would pay them to install it.

"Give us your product for free and it will be great advertising for you." is the same as "Pay us a sum of money and you can put a big sign up on our wall and we will announce your name on every timeout, etc.."

Listen, I don't think this will ever happen. Given the news that Carrier is talking to SU now, what I think will happen is that the renovations will make the dome a "different building than what Carrier donated to" and Carrier or another company will pay for naming rights. To me, that has a 60% chance of happening. The "Trane idea" is maybe at 10% or less I admit.

Brand recognition, huh?

What % of the people that buy HVAC don't know Carrier makes HVAC?

If the answer is 100%, then spending $$$ to get "name recognition" is crazy.

One of the great problems with the business of Advertising is that everyone thinks they know something about it because they are consumers of advertising. Or the watched "Mad Men".

 

[shandeezy7]

Brand recognition, huh?

What % of the people that buy HVAC don't know Carrier makes HVAC?

If the answer is 100%, then spending $$$ to get "name recognition" is crazy.

One of the great problems with the business of Advertising is that everyone thinks they know something about it because they are consumers of advertising. Or the watched "Mad Men".

What % of people that buy cola products don't know that Coca-Cola company makes Coke?

 

[Townie72]

Townie's Fearless Prediction on this.

SU will buy Carrier out.

If Carrier wants to play hardball on this, and SU really could get $2M a year, then I'd ask for $10M. Carrier won't play hard ball, but this isn't going to be any kind of give-away price. It will be at least $2.4M.

Carrier will not "Be a player" for anything close to $2M a year. The value isn't close to that for them.

SU will not pursue suing Carrier on the basis that this is somehow not going to b the same building. SU is likely to lose that suit and if they do, then what?

 

[Townie72]

What % of people that buy cola products don't know that Coca-Cola company makes Coke?

Right. And that's why Coke doesn't do Name Recognition advertising. They have other advertising objectives. But in order to understand that, you have to have a good understanding of Advertising theory and practice ... beyond watching Ads on TV.

 

[OttoMets]

Townie's Fearless Prediction on this.

SU will buy Carrier out.

If Carrier wants to play hardball on this, and SU really could get $2M a year, then I'd ask for $10M. Carrier won't play hard ball, but this isn't going to be any kind of give-away price. It will be at least $2.4M.

Carrier will not "Be a player" for anything close to $2M a year. The value isn't close to that for them.

SU will not pursue suing Carrier on the basis that this is somehow not going to b the same building. SU is likely to lose that suit and if they do, then what?

I'm going to pretty confidently predict that no one's going to be a player for $2 million a year. I'd be pretty surprised if SU can find someone to pay even half that.

It's a small market with very few corporations and we're talking about a building that has a 35-year history of being universally identified by one simple name.

There's not a ton of value here, regardless of what some recycled off-the-cuff quote from a sports marketing guy would lead some to believe.

 

[BKCuse]

Your memory is faulty for sure. I would prefer to see a new name and some cashflow. I just said it would not be simple to do. There are legal reasons that make it difficult That was and still is my argument. For some strange reason you took that to mean I was against renaming it. I also said that SU buying it out for what it is worth is a wash for SU.

Thanks to the internets we don't need to rely on memory so here are some of your quotes since I think you may have forgotten the position you took:


" The Carrier dome was named in honor of a gift. It's like saying that about every building on the hill named after a donor. Should we payoff the Crouse family so we can rename Crouse College?"

"There is no difference between a private family donation toward an academic building and a corporate donation toward an athletic building. They are the same. And when this happened, everyone was thrilled with the donation. Reality is tough to deal with sometimes so we come up with all kinds of ways to avoid it when we think something is "not fair"."

"Of course the name is legally binding ...that is how these gifts work. That is part of why many gifts are given...to have buildings named in perpetuity."

"We don't break agreements in this country because of some subjective view that says "Oh, they made enough money on their investment so it should now be null and void."


There's no shame in having changed your mind xc84 even if you were a little high and mighty while defending Carrier way back then. I'm just glad to see that you now share my view. Carrier has gotten more than their fair share of value and it's time to move forward with either a new deal from Carrier or another sponsor.

btw here's the original thread if you care to check any of your above quotes
Dome

 

[xc84]

Thanks to the internets we don't need to rely on memory so here are some of your quotes since I think you may have forgotten the position you took:


" The Carrier dome was named in honor of a gift. It's like saying that about every building on the hill named after a donor. Should we payoff the Crouse family so we can rename Crouse College?"

"There is no difference between a private family donation toward an academic building and a corporate donation toward an athletic building. They are the same. And when this happened, everyone was thrilled with the donation. Reality is tough to deal with sometimes so we come up with all kinds of ways to avoid it when we think something is "not fair"."

"Of course the name is legally binding ...that is how these gifts work. That is part of why many gifts are given...to have buildings named in perpetuity."

"We don't break agreements in this country because of some subjective view that says "Oh, they made enough money on their investment so it should now be null and void."


There's no shame in having changed your mind xc84 even if you were a little high and mighty while defending Carrier way back then. I'm just glad to see that you now share my view. Carrier has gotten more than their fair share of value and it's time to move forward with either a new deal from Carrier or another sponsor.

btw here's the original thread if you care to check any of your above quotes
Dome

I still stand by all those statement of course. Silly people proposed we could simply give Carrier their money back because they "had their name on it long enough" or "were not loyal to the area" or it is all "not fair" or "they made enough money" ... all passionate emotional responses...but not relevant to the actual legal issue at hand. Try to keep emotions in check and deal with facts and what I said. None of what I said "defended Carrier". I just defended the reality of the situation...still do.
From February:

The name is a small part of "moving forward". I would be happy if Carrier relinquished the name. I am not afraid of that at all. I would love a renovated dome. However, they are independent issues. It will take a lot more than a "savvy lawyer" to get a new name."

"I have no sympathy for Carrier either...but it is irrelevant. I know that SU has said on multiple occasions that they have looked into it and there is nothing they can do. That's not a guess on my part. I have already said there is likely a threshold of renovations where the building becomes a different building."

"It depends on a legal matter involving the point at which the building is no longer the same building that was gifted. I have no idea what would be decided in court or what the legal definitions are. Sure, they could "argue" at a point that it is not the same building but that does not mean they would legally prevail. My guess would be that it is no longer recognizable as the same...and I don't know how substantial the renovations would need to be for that to be true. I don't think any of us know and that is why it likely won't be answered here. Maybe there is a precedent?"

 

[xc84]

Brand recognition, huh?

What % of the people that buy HVAC don't know Carrier makes HVAC?

If the answer is 100%, then spending $$$ to get "name recognition" is crazy.

One of the great problems with the business of Advertising is that everyone thinks they know something about it because they are consumers of advertising. Or the watched "Mad Men".

Ok. You tell me why companies buy naming rights to stadiums. The Detroit Lions play at "Ford Field". Ford paid $50M for that naming rights. Is there anyone in the world that does not know Ford makes automobiles or heard of Ford? And, I have never watched "Mad Men".

 

[xc84]

Townie's Fearless Prediction on this.

SU will buy Carrier out.

If Carrier wants to play hardball on this, and SU really could get $2M a year, then I'd ask for $10M. Carrier won't play hard ball, but this isn't going to be any kind of give-away price. It will be at least $2.4M.

Carrier will not "Be a player" for anything close to $2M a year. The value isn't close to that for them.

SU will not pursue suing Carrier on the basis that this is somehow not going to b the same building. SU is likely to lose that suit and if they do, then what?

Ok... how much is SU willing to pay to Carrier to "buy them out"? If it is any less than the rights are worth, Carrier would be short-changed...if it is equal to or more, SU gets no benefit. If SU can sell the rights for e.g. $12M, why would Carrier accept less?

 

[xc84]

Right. And that's why Coke doesn't do Name Recognition advertising. They have other advertising objectives. But in order to understand that, you have to have a good understanding of Advertising theory and practice ... beyond watching Ads on TV.

Coca Cola has at least 4 stadiums/arenas in their name. Stop harping on "name recognition". Call it whatever you want, there is a benefit they pay for.

 

[shandeezy7]

I'm going to pretty confidently predict that no one's going to be a player for $2 million a year. I'd be pretty surprised if SU can find someone to pay even half that.

It's a small market with very few corporations and we're talking about a building that has a 35-year history of being universally identified by one simple name.

There's not a ton of value here, regardless of what some recycled off-the-cuff quote from a sports marketing guy would lead some to believe.

Idk, you may be underestimating the value a bit now. I do get that stadium naming rights deals usually come from companies with a large presence in the market. I also don't think $2 million/year is likely, but I could easily see $1 million/year. Just a couple examples of some stadium naming deals in similar markets:

- InfoCision Stadium - home of the Akron Zips. 10 years/$5M ($500k/year). Slightly larger metro area, but obviously a much lower profile program. Also only a football facility, not football/basketball.
- Albertson's Stadium - home of Boise State. 15 years/$12.5M ($833k/year). Almost the exact same size metro. Again, football-only facility. Albertson's is a grocery chain (hint hint Wegmans, although it's a considerably smaller chain.)
- Apogee Stadium - home of the University of North Texas. 20 years/$20M ($1M/year). Slightly smaller city than Syracuse. I guess you could put it into the Dallas/Fort Worth metro (or just outside of it). Football only facility with less exposure than Syracuse.

Looking at the list of naming rights deals across the country (college and pro) there doesn't appear to be much rhyme or reason as to how much money is spent on naming rights deals. It would certainly not surprise me if the university were able to secure a 7 figure per year deal though, assuming they could get out of the Carrier deal, of course.

 

[OttoMets]

Idk, you may be underestimating the value a bit now. I do get that stadium naming rights deals usually come from companies with a large presence in the market. I also don't think $2 million/year is likely, but I could easily see $1 million/year. Just a couple examples of some stadium naming deals in similar markets:

- InfoCision Stadium - home of the Akron Zips. 10 years/$5M ($500k/year). Slightly larger metro area, but obviously a much lower profile program. Also only a football facility, not football/basketball.
- Albertson's Stadium - home of Boise State. 15 years/$12.5M ($833k/year). Almost the exact same size metro. Again, football-only facility. Albertson's is a grocery chain (hint hint Wegmans, although it's a considerably smaller chain.)
- Apogee Stadium - home of the University of North Texas. 20 years/$20M ($1M/year). Slightly smaller city than Syracuse. I guess you could put it into the Dallas/Fort Worth metro (or just outside of it). Football only facility with less exposure than Syracuse.

Looking at the list of naming rights deals across the country (college and pro) there doesn't appear to be much rhyme or reason as to how much money is spent on naming rights deals. It would certainly not surprise me if the university were able to secure a 7 figure per year deal though, assuming they could get out of the Carrier deal, of course.

Agree with most of what you say here, and I appreciate the data points.

Cursory thoughts - I'd guess Syracuse is more attractive than Akron, maybe less than Boise. That the dome has had the Carrier name on it for so long will, I believe, diminish the value for a potential buyer - it's got name recognition baked in, and a ton of people are still going to call it the Carrier Dome.

You hit the nail on the head when you note that there's no rhyme or reason to this. If SU buys its way out of the Carrier gift, it might find a barren market or it might find some corporation that wants to pay $3 million a year. It's all about the right parties finding what they believe to be a favorable deal at the right time. (I don't think Wegmans will be a player here, though.)

 

[Cheriehoop]

I will place my $$$$$ on Turning Stone Place or Turning Stone Field...

Wonder how interested Wegman's would be especially since they have been expanding nationally particularly in ACC territory.

 

[sutomcat]

Wonder how interested Wegman's would be especially since they have been expanding nationally particularly in ACC territory.

Taking into account recent expansion, Wegman's would be a great fit. Especially if that expansion continues southward through the remaining ACC markets.

Though I will note that Fuccillo has car dealerships in Pennsylvania, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Kentucky, Georgia and Florida...

 

[Toga]

Taking into account recent expansion, Wegman's would be a great fit. Especially if that expansion continues southward through the remaining ACC markets.

Though I will note that Fuccillo has car dealerships in Pennsylvania, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Kentucky, Georgia and Florida...

The top two targets for sure. Billy of course played FB at Syracuse.

 

[shandeezy7]

Agree with most of what you say here, and I appreciate the data points.

Cursory thoughts - I'd guess Syracuse is more attractive than Akron, maybe less than Boise. That the dome has had the Carrier name on it for so long will, I believe, diminish the value for a potential buyer - it's got name recognition baked in, and a ton of people are still going to call it the Carrier Dome.

You hit the nail on the head when you note that there's no rhyme or reason to this. If SU buys its way out of the Carrier gift, it might find a barren market or it might find some corporation that wants to pay $3 million a year. It's all about the right parties finding what they believe to be a favorable deal at the right time. (I don't think Wegmans will be a player here, though.)

I think it's also interesting to note that Syracuse is the only university that plays the two big revenue sports in the same facility. Would like to know what effect that would have on the value compared to other arenas/stadiums.

 

[OttoMets]

I think it's also interesting to note that Syracuse is the only university that plays the two big revenue sports in the same facility. Would like to know what effect that would have on the value compared to other arenas/stadiums.

I wonder that too. Don't know a ton about this, but it can only enhance the value, right?

 

[BKCuse]

I still stand by all those statement of course. Silly people proposed we could simply give Carrier their money back because they "had their name on it long enough" or "were not loyal to the area" or it is all "not fair" or "they made enough money" ... all passionate emotional responses...but not relevant to the actual legal issue at hand. Try to keep emotions in check and deal with facts and what I said. None of what I said "defended Carrier". I just defended the reality of the situation...still do.
From February:

The name is a small part of "moving forward". I would be happy if Carrier relinquished the name. I am not afraid of that at all. I would love a renovated dome. However, they are independent issues. It will take a lot more than a "savvy lawyer" to get a new name."

"I have no sympathy for Carrier either...but it is irrelevant. I know that SU has said on multiple occasions that they have looked into it and there is nothing they can do. That's not a guess on my part. I have already said there is likely a threshold of renovations where the building becomes a different building."

"It depends on a legal matter involving the point at which the building is no longer the same building that was gifted. I have no idea what would be decided in court or what the legal definitions are. Sure, they could "argue" at a point that it is not the same building but that does not mean they would legally prevail. My guess would be that it is no longer recognizable as the same...and I don't know how substantial the renovations would need to be for that to be true. I don't think any of us know and that is why it likely won't be answered here. Maybe there is a precedent?"

Dance around it all you like my friend but last year you were fervently defending Carrier's rights against my suggestions that we break the deal.

Now that word is out the University is doing just that you seem to be very accepting and even supportive of this strategy.

Like I said, I'm just happy we are now in agreement on this.

 

[orangetrain]

Fuccillo is out. The relationship has been severed.

 

[Toga]

Fuccillo is out. The relationship has been severed.

That's huge.

 

[xc84]

Dance around it all you like my friend but last year you were fervently defending Carrier's rights against my suggestions that we break the deal.

Now that word is out the University is doing just that you seem to be very accepting and even supportive of this strategy.

Like I said, I'm just happy we are now in agreement on this.

You can't read...or are delusional. But hey, if it works for you.

 

[xc84]

Fuccillo is out. The relationship has been severed.

How so? Just curious.

 

[orangetrain]

They had a falling out several years ago. Not positive if its been repaired or can be repaired.

 

[xc84]

They had a falling out several years ago. Not positive if its been repaired or can be repaired.

That's too bad. I had never heard of that but wondered why a former player /successful Syracuse businessman would not be involved much.

 

[rocklloyd]

So?

The point was that there aren't enough left to have a bearing on what Carrier thinks and does.

If you have a huge presence in a community you act differently than if just a small percentage of your operations are there.

The fact that GE took more people out is irrelevant.

What we read on hear is a idea that Carrier is going to be intimidated by the potential of having competitive AC equipment installed in a building they bought the naming rights to 36 years ago.

You've lost me in your logic train, but we will agree on one thing. In the end carrier will not care whose equipment is in building.