Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="OttoMets, post: 1792589, member: 716"]
But changing the value doesn't change what it inherently is: the same house.

This is an interesting philosophical question, but kind of an easy one. Townie's not wrong on this one.

It's all academic, and it's presumptuous for all of us to speculate too much on this without (I'm guessing) knowing anything about the original gift agreement or any negotiations that have taken place since then.

But a renovated building is the same building. This renovated Dome would, from a legal standpoint, surely be considered the same building is was before the renovations.

Houston came off very badly in that renaming flap and lawsuit; it'd be a shame for SU to do the same. Everyone here would like SU to have the best possible renovation of the Dome, but I think it's silly for us to make these tortured arguments about how SU would be on ethically firm ground if a) Dome renovations take place roughly as proposed, b) Carrier wants its gift to stand, and c) SU seeks to renege on the gift agreement without buying out Carrier. That'd be ugly and wrong. We'd still have the nice new stadium; Carrier would still be the profit-seeking, union-busting corporation that some love to hate; and SU would (maybe...but I'm not seeing it) get some revenue from a new naming sponsor (in a term-agreement, not gift, form).

Anyway, it's all speculative.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?