The Rights to a Name
In Chicago, one of the hot topics is the possibility that Sam Zell (the new owner of the Cubs) will sell naming rights to Wrigley Field. Selling the name of arenas, buildings and other things of importance is relatively new, but rapidly becoming commonplace. I wonder where it will stop.
Many US cities have been renamed for various reasons. East Detroit, MI became Eastpointe, MI in 1992, to disassociate it from Detroit, MI. Perhaps the most famous name change occurred in the 1950s when Hot Springs, NM became Truth or Consequences, NM as part of a promotion for a radio program of the same name. Halfway, OR became Half.com, OR in 1999, in exchange for $100,000 and other considerations.
There is a government department which controls such matters. In fact, the United States Board on Geographic Names dismissed a proposed name change by Hamilton, OH. The city proposed a change to “Hamilton!” to generate more excitement. The USBGN ruled the proposal as frivolous.
Apparently, $100,000+ was not frivolous to Halfway, OR. However, by today’s standards that amount is minimal. Companies have paid more than $75 million dollars for long-term naming right to various athletic stadiums like U.S. Cellular (Chicago), Minute Maid Park (Houston), Qwest Field (Seattle) and many more.
If companies are willing to pay that type of money to have their names on stadiums, how long will it be before we start seeing cities like Coca-Cola, GA and Hasbro, RI? In 1912, the Kohler Company created Kohler, WI as a planned community. Why go through all of that hard work when you can plunk down cash and buy an established city?
I understand the economic impact, but I dislike the concept. I liked the old names of stadiums. I like the Hoosier Dome (Indianapolis), Mile High Stadium (Denver) and The Spectrum (Philadelphia). These names had uniqueness, history and staying power. The new names are interchangeable and subject to the length of the contract.
I have already lost the stadium name battle. Now, I just hope it ends here without affecting cities. I would hate to see future students learning their city got named after a major corporation plunked down $200 million.
Although I love the map books of the local mapmaker (especially important in the distribution business), I don’t want to live in Rand McNally, IL.
-John Wroblewski, distribution specialist
March 26th, 2008 at 11:12 am
Call me old school, but I hate the new stadium names, too. Sadly, it all comes down to money. Funny though, the fans never seem to benefit from the extra cash flow.
March 26th, 2008 at 11:38 am
They can change the name of my city any time, if they include a tax cut!
March 26th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
I couldn’t care less what the stadium is called. I just want a winner. I guess I would not want cities to start selling out though. That could get ridiculous.
March 26th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
It all comes down to money. Buying the naming rights to cities will happen, unless the government steps in. But when money is talking, there will probably be some sort of compromise.
March 26th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
There would be a huge cost to renaming a city. Everywhere the name is listed would need to be updated. In books, on signs, on buildings, on paperwork…that cost would be high. Although when you are talking 100’s of millions, I guess it is chump change.
March 26th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Dodger Stadium, Los Angeles Coliseum, Rose Bowl, Pauley Pavillion and Galen Center. With the exception of the last one, there is so much history with these venues. Changing their name/s would be ridiculous.
As far as renaming cities are concerned, can you invite some of these companies to look at a few Southern California areas? Everything has a price tag here…
March 27th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
Follow the money. Sadly, it is always about the money.
March 27th, 2008 at 9:16 pm
Actually I heard Steinbrenner was turned down in excess of $20 million per year to rename Yankee Stadium. Good to see history and tradition prevail once at least.