Development in and Around Syracuse Discussion | Page 44 | Syracusefan.com

Development in and Around Syracuse Discussion

There’s nearly a zero % chance this is correct.

It’s not just “a few million dollars”.
It could be a million or more dollars per year, every year, forever.

It’s not a coincidence that the word “Carrier” has been conspicuously absent from any and all communications regarding the Dome reno project, from the start.
I agree, it is an iconic building and I would bet it is more.
 
There’s nearly a zero % chance this is correct.

It’s not just “a few million dollars”.
It could be a million or more dollars per year, every year, forever.

It’s not a coincidence that the word “Carrier” has been conspicuously absent from any and all communications regarding the Dome reno project, from the start.

I respectfully disagree. You are looking at one revenue stream, like most people look at the alleged B1G payouts. The number is smoke and mirrors, no one discusses the fact that the B1G revenue is inflated by shared gate receipts. Likewise, naming rights are smoke and mirrors. Yes, there is a cash payout, but there are other obligations that cost the university money.

Furthermore, you claim there is nearly zero chance that I may be correct. Yet, the university has a history of planning very well and controlling spending. They have announced the building will have AC, they have a plan. Yes, they could go with another manufacturer. But as much as the name change would hurt Carrier, it would also hurt SU. Goodwill has an intrinsic value that is not readily measured by dollars.

Carrier is less likely to give up the name on the Dome without making an offer of something. Recall that when the Dome was originally built, Carrier offered to install AC for free. Payments may be in kind; SU has a few buildings with AC units. All in all, there is probably a much deeper relationship than you and I know.

You allege that "Carrier" has been conspicuously absent from any and all communications regarding the Dome reno project, from the start. However, this is not as accurate as you may think:

Carrier Dome Home - Carrier Dome - Syracuse University The logo stating Carrier Dome in on the home page, let alone in the name of the website.

University Takes Next Step on Campus Framework, Including West Campus Project This article identifies the Dome as the Carrier Dome, it focuses on the plans for West Campus.

Dome Locker Room Complex Makeover to Improve Student-Athlete Experience - Syracuse University Athletics This article is about the locker room renovation, yet it mentions the Carrier Dome.

There are many references to the Carrier Dome outside of the SU websites, too many to reproduce here. The fact that people refer to the Carrier Dome is as the "Dome" is meaningless. Dome is a shortening in of the official name - a nickname, like referring to Syracuse University as Syracuse, Cuse, SU.

Anyway, it is not worth fighting over too much as neither of us are decision makers in this process and if we were, neither of us would be able to reveal anything.
 
A couple of thoughts.

1. If you ask a lawyer for advice on a contract dispute and he doesn't want to see the contract before advising you, get a different lawyer. The point is, any opinions on SU's ability to unilaterally rename the "new" building offered by people who haven't seen the relevant contracts is not worthy of your reliance.

2. When a building has a name from the start for a number of years, the value of its naming rights go down considerably because a new company legitimately can doubt whether a new name will take hold in the public consciousness. When the Washington Nationals didn't find a naming partner right away for its new stadium, the value of naming rights went down because the public is now used to calling the park "Nats Park." When Arsenal Football Club's stadium naming rights deal with Emirates Airlines was ending, the naming rights were more valuable to Emirates Airlines than to other potential bidders for the same reason. So if SU tries to sell the naming rights, XYZ Corporation is going to wonder whether people will still refer to the facility as the Carrier Dome or just The Dome.
 
Archbold Gym was built in 1908 with money donated by John D. Archbold.

Since it's being gutted and totally renovated, is it fair game for SU to sell the naming rights to a new sponsor?
 
A couple of thoughts.

1. If you ask a lawyer for advice on a contract dispute and he doesn't want to see the contract before advising you, get a different lawyer. The point is, any opinions on SU's ability to unilaterally rename the "new" building offered by people who haven't seen the relevant contracts is not worthy of your reliance.

2. When a building has a name from the start for a number of years, the value of its naming rights go down considerably because a new company legitimately can doubt whether a new name will take hold in the public consciousness. When the Washington Nationals didn't find a naming partner right away for its new stadium, the value of naming rights went down because the public is now used to calling the park "Nats Park." When Arsenal Football Club's stadium naming rights deal with Emirates Airlines was ending, the naming rights were more valuable to Emirates Airlines than to other potential bidders for the same reason. So if SU tries to sell the naming rights, XYZ Corporation is going to wonder whether people will still refer to the facility as the Carrier Dome or just The Dome.

That's appears to be your opinion versus fact, especially one from a universal standpoint. Cleveland's Jacobs Field was known that for years, however, it's known today and for a while now as Progressive Field. I doubt your theory can be proven as Progressive Field is getting plenty PR, etc. Same for Cleveland Browns Stadium, that is now known as First Energy Stadium. Plenty bang for their buck there as well. Again, your theory of 'value going down considerably' is one difficult to measure with any degree of accuracy from a tangible stand point.
 
That's appears to be your opinion versus fact, especially one from a universal standpoint. Cleveland's Jacobs Field was known that for years, however, it's known today and for a while now as Progressive Field. I doubt your theory can be proven as Progressive Field is getting plenty PR, etc. Same for Cleveland Browns Stadium, that is now known as First Energy Stadium. Plenty bang for their buck there as well. Again, your theory of 'value going down considerably' is one difficult to measure with any degree of accuracy from a tangible stand point.

If you had offered me $100 to tell you the name of the Cleveland Browns stadium, I couldn’t have done it. If you had asked me to name the Cleveland Indians stadium, I probably would have said Jacobs Field or even Municipal Stadium before guessing Progressive.
 
If you had offered me $100 to tell you the name of the Cleveland Browns stadium, I couldn’t have done it. If you had asked me to name the Cleveland Indians stadium, I probably would have said Jacobs Field or even Municipal Stadium before guessing Progressive.

I only know the Browns stadium as the factory of sadness

(from 2011)

 
If you had offered me $100 to tell you the name of the Cleveland Browns stadium, I couldn’t have done it. If you had asked me to name the Cleveland Indians stadium, I probably would have said Jacobs Field or even Municipal Stadium before guessing Progressive.

Well, that likely may have to do with Cleveland being a small market team vs. large, but doesn't prove your theory. I guess, according to this rationale, the Houston Texans or Astros for that matter, might as well still play in the 'ol Astrodome. I mean, how many people do you think know where NRG Stadium is? A new stadium at that mind you. Minute Maid Park used to be called The Ballpark at Union Station, Enron Field, and Astros Field, which appears to debunk your diminished value theory relative to previously named venues.
 
Last edited:
Well, that likely may have to do with Cleveland being a small market team vs. large, but doesn't prove your theory. I guess, according to this rationale, the Houston Texans or Astros for that matter, might as well still play in the 'ol Astrodome. I mean, how many people do you think know where NRG Stadium is? A new stadium at that mind you. Minute Maid Park used to be called The Ballpark at Union Station, Enron Field, and Astros Field, which appears to debunk your diminished value theory relative to previously named venues.


You're picking a fight with the wrong guy on this.
 
Archbold Gym was built in 1908 with money donated by John D. Archbold.

Since it's being gutted and totally renovated, is it fair game for SU to sell the naming rights to a new sponsor?

It has. The Barnes family donated $5m for the recreation part of the Arch and I believe with carry their name in some way.
 
It has. The Barnes family donated $5m for the recreation part of the Arch and I believe with carry their name in some way.

It'll be known as the Barnes Center at the Arch, so I assume that means the building itself will retain the Archbold name.
 
You're picking a fight with the wrong guy on this.

Didn't realize I was fighting, just having a friendly debate. :) I have a family member who specializes in contract law, intellectual property, infringement, and various other generally related fields. We had some interesting conversation/debate over the past holiday weekend.
 
Last edited:
47021296_2174201645965970_2910618367775735808_n.jpg
 
$62M apartment building proposed in Syracuse University area; tax breaks sought

Don't see any design renderings, but I'm assuming it will be another cheap looking, soulless apartment building. There won't be any character left on Genesee Street once developers are done with it (developers already took care of a lot of it with those hideous medical/office buildings built in that area in the 80's).
 
Downtown needs more density to create an urban feel. By density I mean aesthetically modern and pleasing 120-250 ft buildings. Nothing to obstruct the view of the state building. But just to fill in the skyline. With the rise in urban population and the return of business to downtown, that time may be nearing in the coming years/decade

I dream
 
At first glance, it's an ambitious plan but a much-needed one. Hopefully things like this really make it clear that the Community Grid is the only option for 81.


Once they get this one done (? - fingers crossed), they need to do something similar near Onondaga Park, which is a neighborhood trying to save beautiful old homes and would be worthy of a similar investment, or maybe South Ave in Elmwood, where it intersects Valley Drive.
 
They're doing more construction on 31 after the train tracks and before Target. Is it going to be a 3rd car dealership in the last 2 years?
 
Once they get this one done (? - fingers crossed), they need to do something similar near Onondaga Park, which is a neighborhood trying to save beautiful old homes and would be worthy of a similar investment, or maybe South Ave in Elmwood, where it intersects Valley Drive.

There is some private investment happening on W. Onondaga St. adjacent to downtown, so hopefully it will start to creep further out and some things happen over there. Pathfinder Bank just announced they are renovating an old mansion into a branch office with community space. Also, from that article:

"Pathfinder’s project is part of a bigger redevelopment of the corner. Salt City Coffee opened in a renovated 1860s house across the street from the mansion in 2017. Next to the coffee shop, Strathmore Community Development Group LLC plans to redevelop the vacant Trinity Episcopal Church, adjoining parish house and the William J. Gillette House into a craft brewery, restaurant and multiple mixed-use office and residential spaces called Trinity Place."

Bank to turn 119-year-old Westside mansion into branch office
 

Forum statistics

Threads
174,184
Messages
5,140,039
Members
6,110
Latest member
chhill

Online statistics

Members online
224
Guests online
1,495
Total visitors
1,719
Top Bottom