« Try This Green(point) Roof on for Size Catsimatidis' 218 Myrtle To Open in September »
June 24, 2009
More Naming Rights for Barclay's
All you Atlantic Yards fans out there in the blogosphere are gonna love this one. Now, not only will you get to (maybe) have an arena with the name Barclay's plastered all over it, you're also going to have a subway station with the name Barclay's plastered all over it. The Times reports that the MTA has reached a deal (finally—they've been looking to do this kind of thing for five years) to sell the naming rights to the Atlantic Avenue station right next to where the arena would be to Barclay's for $4 million. No word on whether Barclay's will be able to pay $800,000 upfront and then take 15 years to pay the rest. Like Ratner, Barclays was able to stretch its payments out over 20 years, making the present value far less than $4 million. Hey, we hear McCarren Park is up for sale too—though the bank will have to get past NAG, Poolaid and its petition first.
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/10337
Comments
"No word on whether Barclay's will be able to pay $800,000 upfront and then take 15 years to pay the rest."
The Times article mentions that the $4M will be paid "$200,000 a year for the next 20 years"
Posted by: tekniskakustik at June 24, 2009 10:20 AM
I can't imagine this is a good deal for the MTA. Changing the name of one of the busiest stations in the United States means that every guide book, every MTA map, every NYC map will have to change. That has to be worth more than $200,000 a year. And what happens after that?
Posted by: harriet at June 24, 2009 10:27 AM
Whoops, that's what we get for skimming...
Posted by: brownstoner at June 24, 2009 10:29 AM
So the MTA is bailing out the hated Ratner as well as a forieign bank that made its fortune in part off of the trans-atlantic slave trade, all to bring JZ and NBA basketball to BK. Now we know why the MTA is broke...
Posted by: Joe from Brooklyn at June 24, 2009 10:39 AM
Hey, I think they're onto something. To get rich is glorious. How about:
Citibank Prospect Park
Verizon Botanic Gardens
Grand Starbucks Plaza
Posted by: WonTon at June 24, 2009 10:40 AM
I'm guessing that nobody will actually refer to it as Barclay's Station, sort of like how nobody but tourists says "Avenue of the Americas."
Posted by: SnarkSlope at June 24, 2009 10:40 AM
JZ = Jay-Z. and it is lebron james we are hoping to get!!!!!
Posted by: randolph at June 24, 2009 10:43 AM
Not sure why Barclays would be doing this unless they are planning to buy a branch network here. It's an overseas bank with no retail presence in NYC (or in the US as a whole as far as I know).
They should also be aware of the widely noted correlation between companies buying naming rights and their falling into financial difficulties! Enron Field in Houston was probably the most notable, but there are plenty of others (Citi, PSINet, Conseco, Qwest etc). Maybe it's because companies agree to these deals at the height of overconfidence.
Posted by: etson at June 24, 2009 10:46 AM
Hey, Etson, there is a very amusing academic paper in your comment! It is well-known that constructing fancy corporate headquarters is a good reason to short a stock, but we'll have to add stadium naming rights to that.
Maybe Barclays has a financial relationship with Forest City?
Posted by: Brooklyn Chicken at June 24, 2009 10:56 AM
So why do I have the feeling that even I, a completely ignorant boob in the area of business and finance, could do a better job making money deals than the people who head the MTA? Why isn't Bloomberg screaming at how crappy a business deal this is, even for a public agency so dedicated to complete incompetence.
Posted by: bxgrl at June 24, 2009 11:07 AM
> Why isn't Bloomberg screaming at how crappy a business deal this is...
Because he is too busy planning the city-wide banning of high fructose corn syrup, scheduled for his richly deserved third term. Emphasis on rich.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at June 24, 2009 11:11 AM
AZ + JAZZ = Jay Z = Gay Z
Posted by: Joe from Brooklyn at June 24, 2009 11:11 AM
ah....and what a sweet deal that will be, snark :-)
Posted by: bxgrl at June 24, 2009 11:14 AM
so, what exactly are we complaining about here? bad business deal? guess not, because the article says both that interest was low, and that the actual value to a company is debatable. do you all have some secret information that someone was clambering for naming rights to this station? if the MTA has been looking, and failed, to do this kind of deal for 5 years, during most of which time AY appeared to be a much grander project with a much higher likelihood of coming to fruition, than it now appears, "far less than $4 million" seems like about the right value for these rights.
is it an unprecedented favor for a business interest or an individual? guess not, because we've given honorary street names and station names and stadium names before, and the MTA has tried to do this before in relation to other sports facilities and has said it would do so again, and is probably actively trying to do so.
is it going to cost us more than it brings in? guess not, because FCR is going to pay for the new signage, and the MTA isn't going to revise it's schedules and timetables until after the arena is built - at which time, they'd have to revise them for accuracy anyway.
so, anti-AYers, save your frothing outrage for things that matter, and for which you have at least a plausible argument. complaining about this makes you look kinda silly.
Posted by: i disagree at June 24, 2009 11:32 AM
No one really cares what the name of the station is or will be. Now getting the MTA to run its trains in a timely fashion....
Posted by: East New York at June 24, 2009 11:47 AM
Who CARES?????
It is found money for the MTA, and no one will call it the "Barclays Station" anyway.....
It seems to me it makes ALLOT more sense to collect 4M to symbolically change the name to Barclays, then it does to pay millions to rename the Triboro Bridge the RFK, when no one will ever call it that either.
Posted by: fsrg at June 24, 2009 11:47 AM
"pay millions to rename the Triboro Bridge the RFK, when no one will ever call it that either."
Good point.
Posted by: East New York at June 24, 2009 12:04 PM
They've already got ads on the interiors and exteriors of all the subway cars... if it helps keep the fares down, I'm cool with whatever they want to sell in a train station.
Sadly, I doubt this will stem fare increases. At least they haven't sold off the Brooklyn Bridge yet to private financiers like Patterson said they would.
Posted by: havelc at June 24, 2009 12:04 PM
4 mil stretched out over 20 years is a pittance. It works out to enough "found money" to do what? Buy garbage bags for a week for 5 stations? In return for permanent advertising space in one of the most active stations in the system. The MTA should just lie down and let all the corporate interests steamroller right over them....oh wait- they already did that. I don't care what the name is- I care about the amount of money the MTA seems prepared to lose in order to make it seem they accomplished something.
Posted by: bxgrl at June 24, 2009 12:35 PM
Bxgrl - did you read the article, do you know anything about the advertising market/naming rights?
The MTA has been trying to get such a sponsorship for 5 YEARS, Boston tried and found no takers....there is no "permanent advertising" as you suggest...4M dollars is......4M dollars - which is allot of $, especially in this advertising market.
I am sure if you have a client willing to pay more than 4M for naming rights they will give you a hefty brokerage fee - if not please keep from monday-morning-quarterbacking things you no nothing about.
Posted by: fsrg at June 24, 2009 12:58 PM
fsrq- Yes I have been reading quite a lot in fact , and I know somewhat of the subject- 4 million broken down over 20 years, and with markets, inflation and eveything else factored in, I stand by what I said. We don't have to agree on things but you make yourself look like a jerk when you insult someone because you don't have the wherewithal to make an intelligent or civil response.
Posted by: bxgrl at June 24, 2009 1:08 PM
Barclays naming rights -- your TARP funds at work!!!
Posted by: werner at June 24, 2009 1:14 PM
bxgrl: please specify the amount of money the MTA seems prepared to lose in order to make it seem like they accomplished something.
Posted by: i disagree at June 24, 2009 1:16 PM
I have a huge problem with the idea of slapping the names of corporations onto public transportation hubs. The Atlantic Avenue station is a public amenity. It is paid for by our fares and tax dollars and belongs to all of us, not to Barclays. There's a big difference between putting ads on a train, and allowing companies to buy naming rights. Why don't we just sell off the rights to the name of the borough of Brooklyn?
Even in Hong Kong, where we look at everything as a possible opportunity for making business, we draw the line at selling the names of public places. It is disrespectful to the public to do so.
Posted by: WonTon at June 24, 2009 1:17 PM
If the MTA really wanted the $4 million extra bucks they get from this, why didn't they charge market rate for the Atlantic Yards like any intelligent land owner would?
Why is the MTA selling the farm for nothing and then raising our subway fairs? These are the real questions...
Posted by: werner at June 24, 2009 1:20 PM
A question for all you pro-AYers on here, isn't the $100 million dollars the MTA passed up on their Atlantic Yards land deal a lot of money too?
Posted by: werner at June 24, 2009 1:23 PM
i disagree- and I prefer not to have a discussin with you.
Posted by: bxgrl at June 24, 2009 1:23 PM
excuse me- discussion.
Posted by: bxgrl at June 24, 2009 1:24 PM
werner- they accepted the 100 mil- which is really watered down becuase of the terms of the deal they worked out now (or are working on). They passed up 150mil offered upfront by extell in order to give the rights to Ratner.
Posted by: bxgrl at June 24, 2009 1:26 PM
i disagree,
Bxgirl and anyone with a head are complaining becasue the public got ripped off, big time.
The MTA is giving Ratner a property that was appraised by the MTA at $200M for $20M plus his promise of paying some additional amount over time (don't hold your breath for that. why not just get the spineless board to change the deal again, like he just did?)
Also, they allowed him to renege on the previous deal and build a railyard that is worth $100M less than what he previously agreed to do.
In exchange, he coughs up $200K a year for Barclays signs in the subway station.
This from the same geniuses that turned away $150M up front last year for the same land.
And you have the cojones to defend the deal. What a joke.
Posted by: ontheparkway at June 24, 2009 1:30 PM
Bxgrl - I didnt insult you and again - if you think 4M is not enough please cite a client willing to pay more for the naming rights.
Posted by: fsrg at June 24, 2009 1:58 PM
"if not please keep from monday-morning-quarterbacking things you no nothing about."
And FYI- the correct word in this instance would be "know."
If you don't think your comment was insulting I hate to think what you do find insulting.
4 million over 20 years? That's also insulting.
Posted by: bxgrl at June 24, 2009 2:01 PM
fsrq
Again, please read what people are saying.
Here's the deal--Ratner gets a nearly $200M break from MTA. He pays back $4M spread out over 20 years for these dopey naming rights.
You think that's a good deal?
Posted by: ontheparkway at June 24, 2009 2:16 PM
ontheparkway - last I looked Barclays is not Bruce Ratner, Barclys is paying the 4M, so the deal that the MTA made with Ratner is irrellvant.
And Bxgirl the "if not" is a modifier and therefore is not an "insult" and if you found it "insulting" than I am sorry but it doesnt change the fact that you KNOW nothing about the market value of naming rights of a subway station, or that you can not cite a more lucrative deal anywhere in the country for a comprabable naming right or that you are unable to name a single potential sponsor who would pay more.
I have no idea if the MTA is maximizing the profit potential of this (and apparently neither do you), but I know that getting $4M (for essentially nothing) is far better than $0 and without any evidence to the contrary I have no idea why you feel you are qualified to "insult" the MTA employees who I am sure believe they got the best deal possible
Posted by: fsrg at June 24, 2009 2:37 PM
FSRQ-I repeat- 4 mil payable over 20 years? In prime advertising space (if not now, then when supposedely AY is built) As for "insulting" MTA employees- you mean the same ones the public pays? The same ones who did not take the highest bid for the rights to the rail yards? I may be a know nothing but only a moron would have agreed to that deal. Recognize yourself?
Posted by: bxgrl at June 24, 2009 2:54 PM
This is just window dressing for a public that is being fleeced and a diversion for public entities (the MTA and the Empire State Development Corporation) to hide behind while they abdicate their fiduciary responsibilities. The naming rights for the subway station is chump change compared to the value the MTA is conferring on Forest City Ratner in land rights. Barclays is aiding and abetting the looting of the public coffers by Forest City Ratner in their failed promise of Atlantic Yards.
Posted by: kensch at June 24, 2009 2:57 PM
I seriously doubt that the people in the MTA ad/naming rights area are the ones who negotiated the sale of the railyards.
And I am not sure why you are alluding to me as a "moron" when you just so bitterly complained about "insults". As for me you may note that I rarely criticize people for things that I admittedly don't know about (recognize yourself?)
Posted by: fsrg at June 24, 2009 3:01 PM
FYI- Barclays is paying Ratner 20 mill per year for 20 years for naming rights. 4 mil to the MTA over 20 years- laughable. Especially considering how much public funding ratner needs. Care to tell me who is the bigger fool here? MTA or Ratner?
Posted by: bxgrl at June 24, 2009 3:06 PM
fsrq- since you seem to assume I know nothing- and you know nothing about me, I'd say we even. And you should read better- I actually said only a moron would have agreed to the deal. Asking you if you recognize yourself is not the same as calling you a moron (see your "if not modifier agrument).As for the MTA- do you not think the board negotiated all of these plans? Please. And now I think we're finished.
Posted by: bxgrl at June 24, 2009 3:10 PM
Barclays did not take TARP funds, they are a British bank. It makes sense for them as they are intent on expanding rapidly into the US investment banking market. They grabbed much of what is left of Lehman Bros, including its former HQ at 745 7th Ave. They have kept a lot of Lehman employees. They have just divested themselves of two major businesses in order to raise capital for their expansion, and they are aggressively hiring investment bankers from competitors.
I'm with fsrq, being a free markets kinda guy myself... I'm sure if Ratner/MTA could have gotten more for the rights from someone else, he would have.
Posted by: denton at June 24, 2009 3:12 PM
denton- ESPN has a list of pricing for the naming rights paid to various stadiums. thei ghest on that list seems tp be Inverness Field for the Broncos. The corporate sponsor pays 6 million a year. Ratner is getting 20 million from Barclays for the next 20 years.
Posted by: bxgrl at June 24, 2009 3:24 PM
the Times missed the story here. the story is that Barclays bought naming rights for a Gehry arena. they are not getting that. so FCR has to scramble to find other incentives for Barclays to hang on to the arena naming rights deal. this is one of them, as in:
Bruce to Barclays, we know you are displeased that we're building an airplane hangar now, so how about we put some of your money towards calling a subway stop Barclays Station or whatever shite they choose.
Posted by: brokeland at June 24, 2009 3:28 PM
brokeland- so you're saying basically Ratner got the MTA to sell the naming rights to appease Barclay?
Posted by: bxgrl at June 24, 2009 3:32 PM
I agree with WonTon. Atlantic Station belongs to the public. Selling naming rights disgusts me. Once they do one station they will have to do them all at which point NYC will have sold its soul.
4 mil isn't enough to sell your soul. Who even knows if Barclays will be around in 20 years.
Posted by: grilledsardine at June 24, 2009 3:37 PM
"the deal that the MTA made with Ratner is irrellvant"
fsrq,
I nominate this for the single most brain dead statement ever made about Atlantic Yards.
No one would be arguing about a $200K a year deal for anything if it weren't for the $200M fleecing that Ratner pulled off.
The point is what the public gets and what the public gives up, not whether Barclays or Ratner claims to be paying this tiny slice.
If you don't get that, i can't help you.
Posted by: ontheparkway at June 24, 2009 3:57 PM
Thank you for the comment grilledsardine. (By the way I also think grilled sardines are delicious).
It amazes me that in all the responses here, we are the only two people who feel appalled not by the size of the deal, but by the corporate appropriation of something that belongs to the public! Is everyone so jaded these days that we feel it is okay to sell anything and everything to a private corporation? Suppose every building on Seventh Avenue decided to do a side deal with BoA, or T-Mobile, or Budweiser, and have its exterior wrapped from top to bottom in advertising?
Of course that can't happen--there are zoning laws that prevent such a thing because we all agree that the street belongs to the people, and keeping it beautiful is a public good.
The selling of station naming rights may seem like a trivial thing, but it is not. Everytime we give something that is supposed to be public away to a private interest, we lose another piece of our civil society.
Posted by: WonTon at June 24, 2009 5:04 PM
"Suppose every building on Seventh Avenue decided to do a side deal with BoA, or T-Mobile, or Budweiser, and have its exterior wrapped from top to bottom in advertising?
Of course that can't happen--there are zoning laws that prevent such a thing because we all agree that the street belongs to the people, and keeping it beautiful is a public good."
WonTon, I take it you mean 7th Avenue in PS, cuz if u meant 7th Ave in Times Square, you'd find that the zoning DEMANDS such signage!
Posted by: denton at June 24, 2009 5:11 PM
wonton- I do agree.When I said I didn't care about the name I really was trying to say that for me the issue was being sold so cheaply and being told what a "great deal" it is. But do I think it's right to rename public property for a corporate sponsor? no. (And it hits close to home since part of pacific Street is to be closed off to the public within AY. That's despicable too. In this case, we aren;t selling the public street- we're giving it away.
Posted by: bxgrl at June 24, 2009 5:21 PM
Denton: It should be obvious which Seventh Avenue I'm talking about. This is the Brownstoner blog, not the Skyscrapers blog.
bxgirl: Very good point about giving away the public street. Also despicable: using eminent domain, the power of government, to force property owners to sell to a private developer for his private profit.
Posted by: WonTon at June 24, 2009 5:30 PM
I have the same problem with this naming rights BS that I have had with the AY issue from the start: who consulted the locals?
No one asked me or any of my neighbors whether I wanted an arena there. No one asked me or any of my neighbors if I wanted to change the name of the station we use every day.
And no one asked the people we elected to represent us in these matters either. Instead we get this violation of the public trust foisted on us, for $4M over 20 years - bought so cheaply! At least the RFK Bridge, a), commemorates a great American and, b), was not paid for by a corporation.
This project deliberately dodged local authority and the ULURP process where such input would be a necessary element, and took the Albany route through SEQRA...NO LEGITIMATE PUBLIC INPUT in this process poisons the whole thing, love the arena or hate it.
Posted by: epkwy at June 24, 2009 7:22 PM
For the love of god there's no apostrophe in Barclays. Why do so many people get this wrong.
Posted by: BrooklynLove at June 24, 2009 8:19 PM
It's my understanding that the MTA will technically be the owner of the land under the arena, which Ratner will lease for 99 years for $1. Ratner is trying to finalize the naming rights deal with Barclays for the arena for $400 Million. So, Ratner would be profiting $20 Million a year for 20 years for property that it will not own, and the taxpayers will see none of that income. Oh, but I forgot- Ratner will pay $200,000 a year to the arena's name put on every map of New York City.
Some people take a practical look at this and say, "as long as the trains run on time, I'm fine with the station naming rights deal." The problem is that the MTA is losing out on hundreds of millions of dollars on the arena naming rights deal, so your trains won't be running on time. Add that to the fact that the MTA just agreed to sell the Vanderbilt Yards (appraised at $214 million) for $20 Million now and the rest over 22 years while at the same time it has to borrow money to continue to operate. This is VERY bad news for MTA riders and for New York.
Posted by: harriet at June 25, 2009 1:12 AM
i dont understand, I think New Yorkers like to bitch about the MTA. They are adding a name of arena that is a block away if that which should help people know what stop to get off of. For years the staion at flushing for the mets was Willets Point/Shea Stadium and I bet the MTA got jack for that so now they actually get money.
While 200g's wont pay for much and maybe more could have been extracted who else would be paying that money--its not an advertisement it is the name and its not even the first part of the station name.
Was bxgirl insulted that the MTA got zip for Yankee stadium and Citifield? Thats insulting.
Posted by: peternyc1 at June 25, 2009 5:28 PM
Latest Restaurant Additions
-
Chickadee Chick
added November 6, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Vutera
added November 5, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Park Cafe
added November 4, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Bahia
added November 3, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Aqualis Grill
added November 2, 2009 12:00 PM in Fort Greene -
Wombat
added October 30, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Organic Heights
added October 29, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Giardini Pizza
added October 28, 2009 12:00 PM in Carroll Gardens -
Rye
added October 27, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Bati
added October 26, 2009 12:00 PM in Fort Greene
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.