We can't rename the Dome for money but how about...

[Scooch]

So what's your point? That SU was stupid? Amateurish? What? Or is this just more of the mindless, incessant criticism of the school, the coaches and the players that seems to characterize so much of the discussion on this forum. Or were you correcting my weak statement that this the first or one of the first stadiums to sell naming rights?

At the time, the University was scrambling for the money, as I recall, to close the gap between the cost of the project and the NY State money and what donations they felt they could raise or had raised. With their hands out, they weren't trying to drive any bargains. There wasn't any "auctioning" of the naming rights. And as far as I can tell, SU approached Carrier with the proposition and maybe they thought that a 12 year period or whatever wasn't attractive enough of a deal to get the money they were looking for. While maybe not the first naming rights deal it was far from a common practice at the time.

I thought it was a miracle they got the money from Carrier at the time. Now people are saying we should have cut a better bargain.

Remember the Dome project fell into SU's lap based upon politicians looking to spend money in Central NY so that CNY wouldn't scream about money spent Downstate. And there may have been some pressure to get this thing tied up before the political winds changed direction. Maybe somebody might have raised the question of why NY State taxpayers are building a stadium for a private university.

For the record, at the time I thought the selling of naming rights was "cheesy".

Jesus, you're sensitive. Take it easy, we're talking about stadium naming rights, not peace in the middle east.

My point was that naming deals had been around for a decade when SU cut their deal with Carrier. I know all about the political issues that were in play. It's typically political issues that cause lousy negotiating. Whatever, water under the bridge.

I do find you harping on ethics to be funny though. How ethical was it for Carrier to gut its CNY operations, move to NC, and leave several communities economically damaged? Just to save a few bucks. Finding a creative way to get a better naming deal is down my list if ethical lapses.

 

[Townie72]

Jesus, you're sensitive. Take it easy, we're talking about stadium naming rights, not peace in the middle east.

My point was that naming deals had been around for a decade when SU cut their deal with Carrier. I know all about the political issues that were in play. It's typically political issues that cause lousy negotiating. Whatever, water under the bridge.

I do find you harping on ethics to be funny though. How ethical was it for Carrier to gut its CNY operations, move to NC, and leave several communities economically damaged? Just to save a few bucks. Finding a creative way to get a better naming deal is down my list if ethical lapses.

I don't know all the details, but Carrier's moving out of CNY might be considered ethical if you are a stockholder or a retained employee or a distributor or even a customer. High cost and high tax states make it impossible to compete. And if you can't compete, you go out of business. A company going out of business helps no one. Want to know who the co-culprits are in businesses leaving the State ---- look at labor unions and State and local governments. And those who think that they can repeal the laws of economics by making speeches for the consumption of the gullible.

I am familiar with a company that makes electrical distribution equipment. One of the products they would like to supply along with switchboards and electrical panels are transformers. If they were to continue to manufacture transformers in the US their cost to manufacture would be greater than the average selling price. Their choice was to move the manufacturing of transformers out of the US or simply close the US plant and not manufacture transformers anymore. High taxes and the cost of coping with government regulations closed the plant in the US not evil corporate pirates inflamed with greed.

 

[Scooch]

I don't know all the details, but Carrier's moving out of CNY might be considered ethical if you are a stockholder or a retained employee or a distributor or even a customer. High cost and high tax states make it impossible to compete. And if you can't compete, you go out of business. A company going out of business helps no one. Want to know who the co-culprits are in businesses leaving the State ---- look at labor unions and State and local governments. And those who think that they can repeal the laws of economics by making speeches for the consumption of the gullible.

I am familiar with a company that makes electrical distribution equipment. One of the products they would like to supply along with switchboards and electrical panels are transformers. If they were to continue to manufacture transformers in the US their cost to manufacture would be greater than the average selling price. Their choice was to move the manufacturing of transformers out of the US or simply close the US plant and not manufacture transformers anymore. High taxes and the cost of coping with government regulations closed the plant in the US not evil corporate pirates inflamed with greed.

Dear sweet Lord, just stop. I'm fully aware of the economics of globalization and the ramifications of high tax locales.

This whole thread is a hypothetical exercise in nonsense. Chill.

 

[Moontan]

I don't know all the details, but Carrier's moving out of CNY might be considered ethical if you are a stockholder or a retained employee or a distributor or even a customer. High cost and high tax states make it impossible to compete. And if you can't compete, you go out of business.

The same arguments could be used with regard to Syracuse University's stadium. The Dome is not a traditional academic building. It's a revenue producing facility. The high cost of running a Division I program requires that extra revenue be obtained. Without this revenue it's impossible to compete compete...

 

[Townie72]

The same arguments could be used with regard to Syracuse University's stadium. The Dome is not a traditional academic building. It's a revenue producing facility. The high cost of running a Division I program requires that extra revenue be obtained. Without this revenue it's impossible to compete compete...

That's less true than I suspect you think it is.

NCAA restrictions on the number of scholarships, the number of coaches, recruiting rules, etc. have kept costs down to a level that you can break even ... as Syracuse does. Beyond a certain point more money doesn't help all that much. It's oversold as a excuse.

 

[Moontan]

Beyond a certain point more money doesn't help all that much. It's oversold as a excuse.

Really?

So the school in the city of Buffalo* competes evenly with the school in little old Starkville+?

OK, I'm convinced.

* Buffalo can be replaced by 60 or so other D-I programs... El Paso, Birmingham, Moscow & Las Cruces come to mind.

+ Starkville can be replaced by 30 or more D-I programs in small towns. Oxford, Tuscaloosa & Auburn come to mind.