The Carrier Dome Renaming Thread...

[SUfanNC]

Love the idea. I want a piece big enough to cover the ceiling of my living room though...

King size bed. I always wanted to sleep under the dome Too greedy?

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

This Chancellor is a bit better than the last one.

Understatement of the year favorite.

 

[richmondcuse03]

King size bed. I always wanted to sleep under the dome Too greedy?

I’m thinking a Dome Canopy Pool chair / set could be a nice Xmas present for myself.

 

[blizz]

Text your order. Then you get a text when it’s ready to pick up. Then you pick it up. Then you eat it. Then you digest it. Then it becomes stool.

Not very often, but every once in a while, you...you just take things too far...

 

[Chip]

2) “Hey Dwight, can you read this quote again here with out saying the ‘C’ word? Thanks!”

Rarely does a day go by that I don't hear this one.

 

[OrangeDW]

King size bed. I always wanted to sleep under the dome Too greedy?

I actually may have nodded off a time or two during the GRob years.

 

[Qbobby]

This world frightens and confuses me, but couldn't it be interpreted that the maximum damages to Carrier are equal to and cannot exceed the amount of the gift?

Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer reference. You win 3 internets, well played sir!

 

[JOC44]

This world frightens and confuses me, but couldn't it be interpreted that the maximum damages to Carrier are equal to and cannot exceed the amount of the gift?

Not usually. Contract damages generally are equal to he value of what you’ve wrongly been denied. If Carrier were to prevail, the value of its naming rights surely exceed the amount paid (i.e., Carrier struck a good deal). It’s also possible that a judge could issue an injunction (again assuming Carrier were to win a court case) requiring that the name go back up on the Dome. If the original contract doesn’t require SU to do anything more than put the name up in the Dome, then such an injunction probably wouldn’t require SU to use “Carrier” in its Dome-related literature.

 

[Alsacs]

A suit against SU in DC would never survive a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. DC is not SU’s “home” such that it would be subject to general jurisdiction, and nothing relating to this dispute presumably occurred in DC.

They wouldn’t sue in DC but Syracuse does have personal jurisdiction in DC because they have a campus there.
Carrier wouldn’t sue there anyway.

 

[IDOC]

If Carrier gave 2.75 million in 1979 that would be about 11 million in today’s dollars. That is 275,000 per year for the naming rights to date. Not a bad deal and hopefully this can be all worked out fairly. So the same deal today for 275,000 per year for 40 yrs would be a steal.
Feel free to check my attempt at math.

 

[kirbivore]

So basically we know Chris Carlson reads this board. The argument he is expounding on has been floated in this thread. It’s cool he reads here but atleast give a nod to the board.

Once the Dome undergoes the massive upgrades it is undertaking the deal is extinguished. I guess Carrier could sue in DC since SU technically has a campus there but that venue wouldn’t be a good one for Carrier based on the judges on the bench in DC.

all the sub standard hacks do

 

[Chip]

Not usually. Contract damages generally are equal to he value of what you’ve wrongly been denied. If Carrier were to prevail, the value of its naming rights surely exceed the amount paid (i.e., Carrier struck a good deal). It’s also possible that a judge could issue an injunction (again assuming Carrier were to win a court case) requiring that the name go back up on the Dome. If the original contract doesn’t require SU to do anything more than put the name up in the Dome, then such an injunction probably wouldn’t require SU to use “Carrier” in its Dome-related literature.

 

[JOC44]

They wouldn’t sue in DC but Syracuse does have personal jurisdiction in DC because they have a campus there.
Carrier wouldn’t sue there anyway.

You should read the Supreme Court’s DaimlerChrysler decision. Having a presence in a jurisdiction does not open you up to personal jurisdiction over matters not related to that presence, unless that presence makes the jurisdiction really and truly your “home” such that you should expect to be sued there generally. Hint, Syracuse University’s “home” jurisdiction is New York.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

Not usually. Contract damages generally are equal to he value of what you’ve wrongly been denied. If Carrier were to prevail, the value of its naming rights surely exceed the amount paid (i.e., Carrier struck a good deal). It’s also possible that a judge could issue an injunction (again assuming Carrier were to win a court case) requiring that the name go back up on the Dome. If the original contract doesn’t require SU to do anything more than put the name up in the Dome, then such an injunction probably wouldn’t require SU to use “Carrier” in its Dome-related literature.

If SU has a naming partner ready to go, might a bond be required by Carrier for the injunction?

 

[NJneer12]

Honestly,

I wonder what Syracuse can get per year from a sponsor. Why not just pay Carrier back a portion or all of of the $2.75M? In reality, you can get that back in 2-3 years of a new deal. It's all revenue anyway.

 

[sendithome]

I hear a sixth state license plate option is on the table if we rename it to the ... Cuomo Dome!!

 

[DoubleDee]

I hear a sixth state license plate option is on the table if we rename it to the ... Cuomo Dome!!

NEVER!!

 

[reedny]

You should read the Supreme Court’s DaimlerChrysler decision. Having a presence in a jurisdiction does not open you up to personal jurisdiction over matters not related to that presence, unless that presence makes the jurisdiction really and truly your “home” such that you should expect to be sued there generally. Hint, Syracuse University’s “home” jurisdiction is New York.

Nexus is the test. But I agree with you that bringing a contract case against SU (executed in ny about a ny facility) in another state would probably generate a successful (in personam) jurisdictional motion.

 

[Shenexon]

My guess is that right now Carrier has the right to have their name on the dome but can't tell the university what they have to put into print. This may be a bit of a middle finger to Carrier. Take my opinion with a grain of salt. I am no expert on this stuff.

That’s the way it feels to me, too. Just because the Carrier name is mounted to the outside of the building doesn’t mean the university is obligated to publicize that fact. They’re not paying for Advertising...

 

[Alsacs]

That’s the way it feels to me, too. Just because the Carrier name is mounted to the outside of the building doesn’t mean the university is obligated to publicize that fact. They’re not paying for Advertising...

SU could do this if they wanted too.
The Goldman family made this cover when got the rights to OJ’s book.

 

[CuseOnly]

That’s the way it feels to me, too. Just because the Carrier name is mounted to the outside of the building doesn’t mean the university is obligated to publicize that fact. They’re not paying for Advertising...

Interesting point. Most corporations, especially retail charge an arm and a leg to be on their site, in their catalogs, for naming and branding to be in/at their trade shows, etc.

Just because they paid to name the building doesn't mean that SU is obligated to publicize it in any way shape or form without additional compensation.

They could charge for every mention in every catalog, media guide, TV mention etc. I know that Staples charges like 50k for a banner ad on their website per year or quarter. Maybe the university should approach Carrier with this ala cart style of payment for exposure.

Maybe they would prefer the opt out of the contract and go for a modern naming rights deal instead.

I would bet the archaic 40 year old contract never mentioned TV, website or print mentions, social media, etc.

It just mentioned naming the building.

I think SU has them by the balls if that is the case.

 

[FrancoPizza]

NEVER!!

Cuomo Duomo.

 

[DoubleDee]

This sounds dumb I know, but...
Since this is a naming based on a gift like any other building on campus, couldn’t they do a naming rights thing and tack it on the front? The STATE FARM Carrier Dome or something like that?

 

[JeffCuse]

This sounds dumb I know, but...
Since this is a naming based on a gift like any other building on campus, couldn’t they do a naming rights thing and tack it on the front? The STATE FARM Carrier Dome or something like that?

I was actually wondering myself. I was even being cheekier...The Wegman's Grocery Carrier Dome ...

 

[sufandu]

This sounds dumb I know, but...
Since this is a naming based on a gift like any other building on campus, couldn’t they do a naming rights thing and tack it on the front? The STATE FARM Carrier Dome or something like that?

I've wondered that too.