The Carrier Dome Renaming Thread...

[xc84]

It’s a gift so they can get the tax benefits.

All these donations are classified as “gifts” for tax purposes.
It’s not a naming rights deal as that can’t be used as a tax write off.

And really no one disputes it was a gift with the stipulation that the building was named in honor of the donor... like most buildings there. "You give me money, I name building after you"

 

[orangecuse]

Suppose SU wants to build a new dorm for law school students, and you make a "lifetime naming gift" to the tune of $20 million.

And "Alsacs Hall" is built.

15 years later, SU puts a new roof on the place, yanks your name off, and sells naming rights to the highest bidder.

Do you have a valid lawsuit?

Clearly if SU's concept of a "lifetime naming gift" is only good for 10-15 years, it's not really good for a lifetime.

You should sue for fraud.

Our Lifetime !

Maybe you shouldn't get hung up on what 'lifetime' may actually mean from a legal standpoint.

For instance, I had a high end treadmill not to long ago that came with a "lifetime" warranty on the frame/structure, etc. When I had a significant issue with the framing/structure of the product, I pursued the "lifetime" position and requested either full repair at their cost or replacement. I discovered in this pursuit that "lifetime" is not forever as one may think, but rather X amount of years after that particular product is no longer in manufacturing/being manufactured. Since my product had exceeded that particular period, I was basically chit out of luck.

Now, the Dome is real property versus product, so that standard is likely different and not the same. However, the Dome's old roof design/structure is one that is obsolete in today's world, etc., so at least a significant part of what encompasses this real property is. As noted, the new roof is a completely different structurally designed entity, in addition to the other required changes necessary to the building's foundation (regardless how big/small) in order to support same.

Perhaps the building's significant renovations/improvements, etc. required in order for it be a sustainable & habitable safe environment for patrons, etc. is indeed no longer that same building when that 1979 gift was made. And, with that being the case, its 'original' life expectancy has been exhausted, not to mention that the true intent/spirit of the gift donation was in no way, shape or form the essense of what we see today relative to "naming rights agreements."

 

[xc84]

Holy crap. Groundhog day. We have beaten this horse to death. Gotta just let it play out.

 

[SU68]

If you can walk into the Carrier Dome next fall or winter, lay your hands on the very same door rail that's been there since 1980, sit on the same aluminum bench you've always sat on, rest your elbows on the same concession counter, lean on the same orange railings, all within the same concrete structure...yeah, it's the same building. New roof, upgraded mechanicals. I don't even think this is a question.

Yeah, but can you still pee in the same trough?

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[Whitey23]

 

[upperdeck]

couldnt SU just give the 2million back, i took your gift and decided i didnt want it any more.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[Whitey23]

Strange that he didn't just decline to answer. The plot thickens.

 

[reedny]

Strange that he didn't just decline to answer. The plot thickens.

It's AD-speak for "nothing has changed".

 

[CuseLegacy]

It's AD-speak for "nothing has changed".

Or they got some of the things they wanted from Carrier

 

[HtownOrange]

In a rental ng lawsuit with Carrier, they would argue the present value of naming rights for similar stadiums. Being that SU houses three major men's programs and two major women's programs, the rights have significant value. Also,.as pointed out earlier, the "Dome" is easily recognizable by most sports fans.

Assuming the annual value of the naming rights at $1,000,000 per year (present value) and forth years for the structure, the present value of the loss to Carrier is $40,000,000.

The above is probably low on the annual value and expected duration of the Dome, Carrier would likely argue more extreme values than I used in the example.

That said, I am glad AD Wildhack has plainly stated the name is "Carrier Dome". Not because I have a tie to Carrier but that SU keeps it's word. Some deals are great in hindsight, some do not appear as great. However, an agreement is an agreement and SU places value on its' word. Some values cannot be measured in dollars.

 

[orange79]

Or they got some of the things they wanted from Carrier

That was my first thought also.

My second thought was, "Then why use 'The Stadium' everywhere in communications?"

 

[Orijinal]

Suppose SU wants to build a new dorm for law school students, and you make a "lifetime naming gift" to the tune of $20 million.

And "Alsacs Hall" is built.

15 years later, SU puts a new roof on the place, yanks your name off, and sells naming rights to the highest bidder.

Do you have a valid lawsuit?

Clearly if SU's concept of a "lifetime naming gift" is only good for 10-15 years, it's not really good for a lifetime.

You should sue for fraud.

Except that Carrier donated $2.75 million, not 20, and they have had the name on the Dome for 40 years, not 15. Most buildings, in my estimation, are 50 year buildings anyway ...meaning expected lifetime. SU should get out of this

 

[orangecuse]

That was my first thought also.

My second thought was, "Then why use 'The Stadium' everywhere in communications?" View attachment 182528

My 1st & 2nd thoughts are the same as your latter one. Otherwise, in my opinion, there likely would've been some kind of...we are continuing to work with Carrier relative to this renovation project and in moving forward, etc. I'd bet that the current "roughing" or whatever you may want to call it work that's currently being done in preparation for the AC is not being done by Carrier/anyone affiliated with them. The overall silence relative to same speaks volumes, not to mention the deliberate & intentional "Stadium" references recently.

 

[Orijinal]

John W ain't fooling me. That statement about that basketball game in "The Stadium" is intentional--one in a long line of intentional omissions announcing dome events and stadium events

 

[hoopsupstate]

They started the air conditioning upgrade in phase I instead of phase 2 and I wonder if the reason is Carrier is helping with the cost.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

They started the air conditioning upgrade in phase I instead of phase 2 and I wonder if the reason is Carrier is helping with the cost.

All Carrier has to do is park a flatbed loaded with air conditioning equipment in front of the Dome, and tell the driver to take a long lunch.

 

[HtownOrange]

All Carrier has to do is park a flatbed loaded with air conditioning equipment in front of the Dome, and tell the driver to take a long lunch.

If they throw in some pizza and give advance warning to a certain Orange Fan site, ...

 

[reedny]

If they throw in some pizza and give advance warning to a certain Orange Fan site, ...

If there's a delivery truck loaded with cash all's forgiven.

 

[CuseOnly]

Here's my solution:

SU should sign a deal with Floyd Little and Jim Brown as well as Little, Brown Publishing and call it the Little, Brown Dome.

View attachment 182413View attachment 182414View attachment 182415

They could call the crown truss the "Little Brown Ring"

 

[Hokie Mark]

LOL, and they could play "In the jungle" whenever the team enters the field.

Wrong song. It's all about PRESENTATION!

 

[NJCuse97]

If SU built a brand new stadium at Skytop, Carrier would have no claim to the name.

If the Dome was destroyed in a tornado and rebuilt from the ground up, is it still the Carrier Dome?

Since 1980, the inside of the Dome has been reconfigured a few times (handicapped seating has been added, luxury boxes were added, meeting rooms were converted to office space, etc...). Does that invalidate Carrier's claim?

Does a new roof invalidate the claim? How about new field turf, or a new scoreboard?

John D Archbold donated money in 1908 to build a gym. The building was practically destroyed by a fire in 1947, and was gutted and rebuilt recently. Yet it's still called "The Arch".

But it isn’t Archbold Stadium now, is it?

 

[Orijinal]

What John W conveniently left unsaid is that while Carrier's name is still on the Dome, they won't be using Carrier's name in any promotional material until they can come to a better agreement

 

[xc84]

I see Ivanka dumping Jared soon and hooking up with a Fox News personality.