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…
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.
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.
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.
For the love of god there’s no apostrophe in Barclays. Why do so many people get this wrong.
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.
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.
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.
“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!
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.
ontheparkway
Barclays Capital =/ Bruce Ratner