Pepsi Center is not Pepsi Center. It is Times Union Center ... but I agree the dome gets great exposure for a national company.Pepsi Center gets zero visibility nationally. You are underselling the Dome, IMO.
Pepsi Center is not Pepsi Center. It is Times Union Center ... but I agree the dome gets great exposure for a national company.Pepsi Center gets zero visibility nationally. You are underselling the Dome, IMO.
Is there case law on such a tactic? I had a similar thought, although I doubt it has legs. I've worked with state agencies before that administer building codes, and renovations beyond a certain statutorily-determined threshold can trigger a complete reinspection under current regs, as if it were a new construction. Same kind of thing as the power plant regs that allow plants to make some upgrades without having to break the bank trying to retrofit every single thing.If it takes over $150 Million to retro fit the dome it will no longer be the same structure that Carrier spent the $2.5 Million on. If I'm SU's legal counsel I'd send Carrier a letter terminating the agreement the second the work starts. Let Carrier take the flack for trying to enforce the agreement.
And in the cartoon's analogy, duck season is that Carrier wouldn't be dumba$$es and take pennies on the dollar for an asset that they own free and clear, and that it's actually duck season.
Orangejet said:Not sure if this was posted and apologize if it was but the Cuse should raise money to retro the Dome and send something like this to prospective recruits and the nation. Sweet! http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/02/miami-dolphins-stadium-renovations-rendering
Not sure if this was posted and apologize if it was but the Cuse should raise money to retro the Dome and send something like this to prospective recruits and the nation. Sweet!
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/02/miami-dolphins-stadium-renovations-rendering
Is it just me or am I the only one who is wondering why Baylor (Texas) or Miami's (Florida) non-dome stadiums are good templates for SU's which uses the domed facility in the Northeast for both football and basketball? I am not getting the connection other than they are both nice stadiums.Thats pretty cool. A major dome reno will be a boom for the university and the Football program. We need to capitalize by having some momentum going into the new facility. Just look at Baylor.
Is it just me or am I the only one who is wondering why Baylor (Texas) or Miami's (Florida) non-dome stadiums are good templates for SU's which uses the domed facility in the Northeast for both football and basketball? I am not getting the connection other than they are both nice stadiums.
Call up Morton Salt in Chicago.
Morton was started by a Syracusan in 1848, Syracuse is the Salt City, salt domes, salt corporation, we use more road salt than pretty much everywhere...
If it takes over $150 Million to retro fit the dome it will no longer be the same structure that Carrier spent the $2.5 Million on. If I'm SU's legal counsel I'd send Carrier a letter terminating the agreement the second the work starts. Let Carrier take the flack for trying to enforce the agreement.
You are right. I missed that point. I agree. If they do a major renovation, they should generate a log of excitement about it.I think your missing the point, which is not that we should copy their designs, but that the excitement/build up leading up to and including a major facility reno will be a boom for all the programs that use the facility.
I've said before, get someone to name it that could incorporate the word carrier.
The United States Navy Aircraft Carrier Dome
The USPS POSTAL Carrier Dome
The Old Dominion Freightline Common Carrier Dome.
You get the idea[/QUOTE
USNACD all the way! Can we get a fly over before every game? Post a video camera on top and play it on the video screens?
Agreed. (And I think any deal would be a fraction of that, probably well under $500,000 a year.)
As stated dozens of times in these types of threads, the Washington Nationals haven't found a suitable naming rights deal for their seven-year-old stadium ten blocks from the Capitol. A college stadium in Syracuse is going to be a very difficult sell for any real money.
I think you guys also have too lofty of an expectation for what kind of money a naming rights deal would generate. I'll dig up the link but there's a list of the most lucrative deals and #10 was $7 million/year, for an NFL stadium I believe.
I imagine SU could get no more than $1-2 million a year to slap a corporate name on the Dome. That may be too generous, honestly. I mean no one would turn that down, but it wouldn't be game changing money.
No effin way. Rutgers, Yes i said Rutgers, is getting like 900k for High Point Solutions Stadium yearly, and this was when they were stuck in the old big east during the downturn. We house a top 10 basketball team, as well as football events and lax at the "Dome". We could SURELY get more than 900k for naming rights.
EDIT: I take that back, maybe not. HSBC (Buffalo) and Pepsi (Albany) arent very lucrative. I doubt we could do MUCH better.
http://www.sportsvenues.com/rsv.php?menu=names
It is probably an exclusive rights deal.So the Dome is called Carrier Dome per donation agreement.
Why can't we sell naming rights anyway? Similar to the USF&G Sugar Bowl, or the New Era Pinstripe Bowl. The bowls remain the same but the sponsor changes.
The Mortan Salt Carrier Dome
The State Farm Carrier Dome
The Burdick Automotive Group Carrier Dome
The Axa Advisors Carrier Dome
Etc...
Per the agreement, never take down the name, but offer naming right to the Carrier Dome.
Carrier was acquired, many years ago, by UTC. The brand value of "Carrier Air Conditioning" is such that I doubt anyone who owns it will retire it.It is probably an exclusive rights deal.
What if Carrier were acquired and the brand name was retired in favor of the acquiring company's name?
You seem put a lot more stock in a 35 year old contract that was drawn up before the age of selling naming rights. My guess is if we hire a savvy lawyer we can get out of this ridiculous deal we're stuck with. If they paid 2.75M and we spend another 500M to reno I have to believe we can break that deal from yesteryear.The building is not still named the "Carrier Dome" because of "loyalty". You really went off on tangent that is a non-factor. 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. It is not "naming rights". Carrier does not have the right to rename the building.