Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="reedny, post: 1661155, member: 1423"] I remember at the time of the Dome's construction, corporations weren't exactly lining up for naming rights. So I'm sure CC's 2.75M came in handy. But that was not, even then, a lot of money. And I think Carrier did as much to squander its reputation by not providing the Dome with AC as anyone else. They cold have made the DOME AC a corporate highlight. Instead ... we had 80+ degrees and lots of mary jane fumes. You're right, of course, about the gift agreement. The way I look at it (speculation), even if it's open ended, how long realistically is a court (or Carrier) going to hold up the University from moving on. It's been 35 years. The place needs work, and the work is likely to cost 100 x what Carrier put in. So my rough take would be, give Carrier a chance to step up again with AC and "renaming" rights. And if they're not prepared to re-up 10-fold, move on. [/QUOTE]