Monday, September 21, 2009

(2) Comments

Should Citi cancel Andrew Hall's $100 million pay and $400 million Mets deal? (AOL Daily Finance)

SS

Daily Finance on AOL asks about that naming rights deal.

From the article:  What bothers me is that Pandit appears less embarrassed about pouring out $400 million of shareholder money to put Citi's name on the Mets' new stadium while his company holds $45 billion in Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) money, $306 billion in loan guarantees -- and posted a 2008 loss of $27.7 billion.

Nothing really new, but Mets news is hard to come by these days.

2 Responses to "Should Citi cancel Andrew Hall's $100 million pay and $400 million Mets deal? (AOL Daily Finance)"
TomG said :
September 21, 2009 at 1:50 PM
No. Naming rights are a form of advertising. Should companies that receive government money not be allowed to advertise?
DyHrdMET said :
September 22, 2009 at 9:20 AM
I remember that debate back in the off season even before Shea's body was cold on the ground. I was even getting all excited to see something fail with the new ballpark before it opened (boy if I knew what was inside, that would only seem little). I even ran a poll asking fans what they'd like to see for the ballpark's non-sponsored name.

any bank who receives assistance needs to be wise with their spending, but TomG is right that it is a form of advertising, and it's probably very hard to get the ship righted without advertising. and there are probably legal obstacles if they try to break the deal.

Post a Comment