"The Dome roof"

[Townie72]

The deal whatever the parties, or a judge or jury, say it is.

How people can't see on the surface that this is such a repugnant idea baffles me.

Only lawyers would consider slithering out of the deal.

Like I said, I would trashcan my degrees and write as many letters I have energy to write to newspapers explain that no reputable university would ever consider such a slimy dodge.

 

[Cusefan78]

How people can't see on the surface that this is such a repugnant idea baffles me.

Only lawyers would consider slithering out of the deal.

Like I said, I would trashcan my degrees and write as many letters I have energy to write to newspapers explain that no reputable university would ever consider such a slimy dodge.

It’s not slimy it’s business. Just like leaving Syracuse and moving jobs to Mexico is. Companies do what they have to do.

 

[Townie72]

It’s not slimy it’s business. Just like leaving Syracuse and moving jobs to Mexico is. Companies do what they have to do.

Just cause it's legal doesn't make it right.

And Universities are held to a higher standard.

I'm just telling you what my reaction to SU even suggesting this would be. How it would affect this double alum's view of the Universiy. And I'll bet I'm not alone.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

How people can't see on the surface that this is such a repugnant idea baffles me.

Only lawyers would consider slithering out of the deal.

Like I said, I would trashcan my degrees and write as many letters I have energy to write to newspapers explain that no reputable university would ever consider such a slimy dodge.

Well, I suspect that you must have already done this each time our FB and BB coaches have run off players because they can't help the team, despite their recruiting promises to player and parent alike to look after the player for the next 4-5 years.
Which breach of contract is more morally repugnant: the one between 2 billion dollar businesses or the one between a billion dollar business and a college student and his family?
I hope you will share the prior letters with the board.
With Naming Rights, ‘Perpetuity’ Doesn’t Always Mean Forever

 

[xc84]

How people can't see on the surface that this is such a repugnant idea baffles me.

Only lawyers would consider slithering out of the deal.

Like I said, I would trashcan my degrees and write as many letters I have energy to write to newspapers explain that no reputable university would ever consider such a slimy dodge.

If they get a new roof with an entirely different support system and otherwise change it significantly by spending a couple hundred million dollars, I hardly think that is a "slimy dodge". The original dome cost $26M. This would be a different stadium based on the roof, renovations and the money it costs to do them. If Carrier then still wants the name, it can pay for the rights. I find it quite legal and fair to all parties.

Also, we have been speaking about this from SU's side only. Maybe Carrier should generate goodwill by offering to relinquish the name so that SU can benefit by selling the rights. Of course, legally they don't have to but maybe they should.

 

[OrangePA]

How people can't see on the surface that this is such a repugnant idea baffles me.

Only lawyers would consider slithering out of the deal.

Like I said, I would trashcan my degrees and write as many letters I have energy to write to newspapers explain that no reputable university would ever consider such a slimy dodge.

At one point is the Carrier Dome no longer the Carrier Dome?

For me, the inflated Teflon Roof is the essence of the structure.

Once that is gone, and other changes are made, there is no more Carrier Dome.

It was not the plan that Carrier would leave CNY.

But that is how economics impacted the reality on the ground.

That will happen again I suspect when the new structure is completed.

 

[Townie72]

At one point is the Carrier Dome no longer the Carrier Dome?

For me, the inflated Teflon Roof is the essence of the structure.

Once that is gone, and other changes made, there is no more Carrier Dome.

It was not the plan that Carrier would leave CNY.

But that is how economics impacted the reality on the ground.

That will happen again I suspect when the new structure is completed.

Seems like a convenient, if not contorted, dodge because you want the money for a new facility.

Build a new stadium somewhere else and I have no problem. Put a new roof on the Carrier Dome and it's still the Carrier Dome.

 

[xc84]

Seems like a convenient, if not contorted, dodge because you want the money for a new facility.

Build a new stadium somewhere else and I have no problem. Put a new roof on the Carrier Dome and it's still the Carrier Dome.

It's not just a "new roof". It is an entirely new support structure to support a new roof. It could be new outside structure for widened corridors. New seats. If Carrier were a good corporate citizen, it would relinquish the name voluntarily.

 

[Townie72]

If they get a new roof with an entirely different support system and otherwise change it significantly by spending a couple hundred million dollars, I hardly think that is a "slimy dodge". The original dome cost $26M. This would be a different stadium based on the roof, renovations and the money it costs to do them. If Carrier then still wants the name, it can pay for the rights. I find it quite legal and fair to all parties.

Also, we have been speaking about this from SU's side only. Maybe Carrier should generate goodwill by offering to relinquish the name so that SU can benefit by selling the rights. Of course, legally they don't have to but maybe they should.

Somehow I am reminded of the saying, "If it walks like a duck, ..."

A domed stadium between the Heroy Building and the Forestry school is the Carrier Dome.

Suggesting otherwise to me depends on a contorted logic that few will understand.

Should the Carnegie's and the Hendrick's also free up the names on those buildings so the University can cash in by getting new sponsors?

How about we change the name of The Hall of Languages to "The Hall of Groceries" if Wegmans comes across with some cash.

This gives us an opportunity for new "positioning" statement.

"Syracuse University - Where history, tradition and old agreements never hold us back." Another possibility would be, "Syracuse University - What have you done for us lately?"

 

[OrangePA]

Seems like a convenient, if not contorted, dodge because you want the money for a new facility.

Build a new stadium somewhere else and I have no problem. Put a new roof on the Carrier Dome and it's still the Carrier Dome.

You're darn right I want the money.

Spending $250 million to replace the existing structure is hardly a contorted dodge.

It is a substantial action that justifies a new naming rights campaign.

I know I'm evil and unethical and whatever else you want to call me, but the economics of the situation are part of the natural law and must be honored and respected.

 

[orangecuse]

Just cause it's legal doesn't make it right.

And Universities are held to a higher standard.

I'm just telling you what my reaction to SU even suggesting this would be. How it would affect this double alum's view of the Universiy. And I'll bet I'm not alone.

Your reaction, in the realm of things, wouldn't have any consequences of significance, relatively speaking. Now, if it did, maybe you'd think twice about cutting off your nose to spite your own face.

 

[Townie72]

Well, I suspect that you must have already done this each time our FB and BB coaches have run off players because they can't help the team, despite their recruiting promises to player and parent alike to look after the player for the next 4-5 years.
Which breach of contract is more morally repugnant: the one between 2 billion dollar businesses or the one between a billion dollar business and a college student and his family?
I hope you will share the prior letters with the board.
With Naming Rights, ‘Perpetuity’ Doesn’t Always Mean Forever

Let me see if I understand what you are saying.

Big time college athletics is a seemly business filled with lies and broken promises. Yup. I agree although the unrealistic ideas of the parents and kids also plays into this.

So because I am a fan of the sport, I have to buy into schools and corporations trying to rip one another off?

What that saying about "Two wrongs don't make a right"?

 

[OrangePA]

Somehow I am reminded of the saying, "If it walks like a duck, ..."

A domed stadium between the Heroy Building and the Forestry school is the Carrier Dome.

Suggesting otherwise to me depends on a contorted logic that few will understand.

Should the Carnegie's and the Hendrick's also free up the names on those buildings so the University can cash in by getting new sponsors?

How about we change the name of The Hall of Languages to "The Hall of Groceries" if Wegmans comes across with some cash.

This gives us an opportunity for new "positioning" statement.

"Syracuse University - Where history, tradition and old agreements never hold us back." Another possibility would be, "Syracuse University - What have you done for us lately?"

I guess I see it this way - if a duck becomes a crane - it is a new creature - not the same creature it used to be.

 

[Townie72]

You're darn right I want the money.

Spending $250 million to replace the existing structure is hardly a contorted dodge.

It is a substantial action that justifies a new naming rights campaign.

I know I'm evil and unethical and whatever else you want to call me, but the economics of the situation are part of the natural law and must be honored and respected.

I don't think you are evil and I don't care if your personal code of ethics would allow this.

But I do care about the ethics of Syracuse University. They ought to be like Caesar's wife ... Beyond reproach.

From my experience at SU, the great majority of the students didn't really care that much about football. That seemed to be the province of a minority of the students and many of the local population for whom SU athletics took the place of a local pro team.

My guess is that a large section of the alumni would not like to see SU attempting to do something like this.

 

[Townie72]

I guess I see it this way - if a duck becomes a crane - it is a new creature - not the same creature it used to be.

But putting a new hat on a duck does not make it into a crane.

And your going away to a spa, losing 30 lbs, getting hair implants and a face lift won't change the fact that it's still you. (Although you may need a new passport photo.)

 

[OrangePA]

But putting a new hat on a duck does not make it into a crane.

And your going away to a spa, losing 30 lbs, getting hair implants and a face lift won't change the fact that it's still you. (Although you may need a new passport photo.)

A hat is inanimate object that is nothing more than an accoutrement - placing such an object on the same living creature changes nothing.

Changing the basic structure of a building is quite different.

We just see this differently. And we see the economics and public view of the situation differently. I am most certain that your point of view is the minority view - by a huge margin.

Have a pleasant Sunday.

 

[Townie72]

Your reaction, in the realm of things, wouldn't have any consequences of significance, relatively speaking. Now, if it did, maybe you'd think twice about cutting off your nose to spite your own face.

Actually I think a lot of alums would feel the same way. And I am an alum that actually cares about football and basketball.

Most do not. When I was there at SU, the dorms,frats, library and Marshall Street were filled with students when football games were being played at the same time.

So whole mine may be a single opinion, but I don't think the University would knowingly offend the sensibilities of a lot of alumni. And then there is the faculty, many of which don't like football anyway.

Recommending that someone else spend a lot of money that you might benefit from is pretty easy work if you can get it. You might even ascribe to a "by any means necessary approach".

 

[orangecuse]

Somehow I am reminded of the saying, "If it walks like a duck, ..."

A domed stadium between the Heroy Building and the Forestry school is the Carrier Dome.

Suggesting otherwise to me depends on a contorted logic that few will understand.

Should the Carnegie's and the Hendrick's also free up the names on those buildings so the University can cash in by getting new sponsors?

How about we change the name of The Hall of Languages to "The Hall of Groceries" if Wegmans comes across with some cash.

This gives us an opportunity for new "positioning" statement.

"Syracuse University - Where history, tradition and old agreements never hold us back." Another possibility would be, "Syracuse University - What have you done for us lately?"

Your analogy isn't really on point. You can not compare academic buildings, etc. to a building for the masses for sporting events, concerts, etc. How often do any of those academic buildings, etc. ever get mentioned on TV, in ways as the Dome or other stadium type venues do today? Carrier has benefited exponentially in my opinion over the almost 40 years in ways they certainly never foreseen, constantly being mentioned during national & regional broadcasts. There is no way they ever envisioned anywhere near that degree of free exposure.

The Dome is iconic and recognized all over country, many parts of the world, etc., it's not iconic because of Carrier's name, but because of its presence on Syracuse's campus, Television, etc. and all that that implies. There wasn't any precedent of stadiums being named prior to the Dome, it's a completely different world/climate today in that regard and SU is looking to remain status quo in 2018 and beyond, not remain stuck in the late 70's when Carrier's gift was given. A gift, I'm certain, that Carrier wrote off. Their "consideration" has benefited Carrier exponentially relative to their modest generosity of yesteryear, you'd think with that being the case, Carrier would bend over backwards to assist SU and amicably meet their current request.

 

[Townie72]

A hat is inanimate object that is nothing more than an accoutrement - placing such an object on the same living creature changes nothing.

Changing the basic structure of a building is quite different.

We just see this differently. And we see the economics and public view of the situation differently. I am most certain that your point of view is the minority view - by a huge margin.

Have a pleasant Sunday.

You may be a lot of things, but I doubt "most certain" on this is one of them.

I actually don't think it's going to get to the point where the University will do this.

First, a huge windfall of Government money, on which the $250m project is predicated is very likely to never happen. The political trade-0ff world of 1980 in which SU got money for the Carrier Dome as part of a political trade off for Downstate spending is gone.

It would be way too fat a target for those who would like the money spent on their priorities or for those who would point to this a unnecessary spending raising NY taxes even further.

Secondly, the idea that a new facility is going to have a huge impact on SU's football fortunes is a highly speculative proposition. College football excellence is drifting south. And the real impact of the Dome took seven years to happen in the 1980's.

 

[orangecuse]

Actually I think a lot of alums would feel the same way. And I am an alum that actually cares about football and basketball.

Most do not. When I was there at SU, the dorms,frats, library and Marshall Street were filled with students when football games were being played at the same time.

So whole mine may be a single opinion, but I don't think the University would knowingly offend the sensibilities of a lot of alumni. And then there is the faculty, many of which don't like football anyway.

Recommending that someone else spend a lot of money that you might benefit from is pretty easy work if you can get it. You might even ascribe to a "by any means necessary approach".

I think what you think is your opinion, no different than mine or others. And, just as you like to point out in your arguments and continuous defense of everything JB does and how it doesn't really matter what us internet folk think, the same thing applies here in relation to what the powers that be will do in what they feel is best for the university moving forward.

 

[Townie72]

Your analogy isn't really on point. You can not compare academic buildings, etc. to a building for the masses for sporting events, concerts, etc. How often do any of those academic buildings, etc. ever get mentioned on TV, in ways as the Dome or other stadium type venues do today. Carrier has benefited exponentially in my opinion over the almost 40 years in ways they certainly never foreseen, constantly being mentioned during national & regional broadcasts. There is no way they ever envisioned anywhere near that degree of free exposure.

The Dome is iconic and recognized all over country, many parts of the world, etc., it's not iconic because of Carrier's name, but because of its presence on Syracuse's campus, Television, etc. and all that that implies. here wasn't any precedent of stadiums being named prior to the Dome, it's a completely different world/climate today in that regard and SU is looking to remain status quo in 2018 and beyond, not remain stuck in the late 70's when Carrier's gift was given. A gift, I'm certain, that Carrier wrote off. Their "consideration" has benefited Carrier exponentially relative to their modest generosity of yesteryear, you'd think with that being the case, Carrier would bend over backwards to assist SU and amicably meet their current request.

Oh yes I can compare athletic facilities to academic ones.

A gift is a gift and a deal is a deal.

I know a little about the construction market that Carrier operates in and they get scant benefit from the name. I would venture a guess that most people can't make the connection between the Dome and a the name that's outside on the side of their heat pump. The HVAC sub-contractors bought them anyway.

 

[Townie72]

It’s not slimy it’s business. Just like leaving Syracuse and moving jobs to Mexico is. Companies do what they have to do.

Moving production facilities to a lower cost venue is how you stay in business.

If your product costs are equal to or are greater than you competition's selling price, you are on the rapid slope to going our of business.

A corporation going out of business costs a lot more jobs than shutting down of some production facilities and moving them to a lower wage, lower tax and lower regulation environment.

People like the lower prices this produces but they don't like the lower wages.

You can't have them both.

 

[orangecuse]

Oh yes I can compare athletic facilities to academic ones.

A gift is a gift and a deal is a deal.

I know a little about the construction market that Carrier operates in and they get scant benefit from the name. I would venture a guess that most people can't make the connection between the Dome and a the name that's outside on the side of their heat pump. The HVAC sub-contractors bought them anyway.

Well, I would disagree with your sentiment. I've have seen ads to homeowner's playing here in the Charlotte area for years, our local Home Depot's carry Carrier equipment, etc. It's not just a name known by Carrier's vendors. My wife has been in the construction business for over 28 years (Regional VP of Sales & Marketing) and people today do inquire about what particular systems, manufacturer names, etc. that are being placed in their homes.

Carrier Corporation TV Commercial, 'The Experts'

 

[xc84]

Carrier’s motive for the original donation appears to have been genuine corporate citizenship. Having abandoned the region, it is time for Carrier to step up to the plate and voluntarily relinquish the name as a gesture of good corporate citizenship.

 

[Townie72]

Horschit, Townie. Carrier's in this for cheap recognition, and always has been. With United Technologies "leadership", they've shredded the companies' local footprint in favor of cheap labor in Mechico. They got a sweetheart deal in which SU didn't properly protect itself. Yes, the U needed the money and Carrier paid. Since then, Carrier's gotten 10x, maybe 20x, it's money's worth. This isn't HOL, it's a sports stadium. And Carrier's "gift" has the distinct odor of a naming contract with some murky language. Either way, SU should abide by its promises -- that I agree with -- or make the company whole by buying out the "gift". There are arguments on both sides of this -- can/should SU get out of this raw deal by substantially changing the facility (which is done all the time with academic buildings)? Should they settle with Carrier and get a new sponsor that pays its fair share ..? After all, SU has an obligation to its students and alumni to spend its money wisely and not get ripped off by a company that fell into a windfall and couldn't care less about Syracuse U or local workers.

So notwithstanding your emotional analogies, the equities of this situation heavily favor the University. Personally, my sympathy level for Carrier/UT is ZeropointZero. But I would expect the U to keep it classy. Maybe Carrier/UT will provide $20M worth of facilities infrastructure -- that would certainly improve their image. Or failing that, SU could offer Carrier its $2.5M plus interest at 10% for the first 10-15 years and 5% for the rest and settle with them for <$10m. Then go out and get a real sponsor and sign an agreement that you can live with for a LIMITED period of time.

If the University buys Carrier out, as you suggest, I have no problem with that.

I want the University to "stay classy".

I disagree with everything else you wrote.