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 disagree- and I prefer not to have a discussin with you.
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?
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…
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.
bxgrl: please specify the amount of money the MTA seems prepared to lose in order to make it seem like they accomplished something.
Barclays naming rights — your TARP funds at work!!!
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.
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.
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.