Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="0.2 YNdeeR, post: 4244390, member: 8125"] This has the tone of a lecture but with ambiguity and inconsistency instead of insight. First you say, "[t]he naming rights deal is completely separate to the vendor contract ...". Then you say, "[i}t is usually an addendum". An addendum is a document added to (and usually modifying) the original contract ... by definition, not "completely separate". We don't know what documents comprise the SU/JMA deal, but either way those terms are incongruent. Then you ask, "Are they related?" [the 5g and naming deals]. This is self-evident, since they would involve, at a minimum, the same facility and the same parties. It is also likely that the two deals will run concurrently, i.e., that their terms will overlap for some period of time. Concurrency is likely because the naming rights announcement suggests a deal has been consummated, and the 5g work has been funded (NYS - 20M$) in this year's (2022-23) budget. Precision on any of the contract details is impossible, as we don't have the documents. We don't know the value or term of the naming rights deal. And we don't know the value or term of the 5g deal. We're also in the dark about whether they were executed as one contract with two parts, one contract with an addendum, or two separate contracts. So Bees predictions are as good as yours or anyone else's. Lastly, the point you made about "dollar for dollar" (credit) makes no sense given that: 1) we all use a common currency; 2) we have a new naming rights purchaser; and 3) that naming rights purchaser is also supplying technical services. So it's quite plausible, if not likely, that SU and JMA agreed to a partial offset of the naming rights fees to account for the value of the 5g services. A partial offset is still an equivalency ... to the extent of the credit ("dollar for dollar"); it's just not [I]all[/I] of the dollars. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?