You know it’s going to be a good day when you walk into your office building and a pretty blonde lady hands you a rose.
The reason for the rose was more commercial than romantic, though. The building where I work has new owners and a new management company as of today. A whole bunch of people in formal attire are walking the lobby this morning acting as the welcoming committee.
In the photo of the rose, you see today’s WSJ underneath– there’s an article in the paper today about Joseph Chetrit, the guy who led the investment team who bought the building. This little blurb, however, was particularly intriguing:
The Chetrit-led buying group would “very likely” change the name of the 30-year-old landmark, according to one person. But it won’t be Chetrit Tower; selling naming rights is one way to haul in revenue.
Start thinking of your suggestions now.
Another rant that may exceed the length of your original post…
First of all, what happened to the days when people named buildings after themselves? If I spent a zillion dollars buying a skyscraper, it would be called the Lisa Tower, no question. I own the Lisa Tower–what do I need with someone’s measly $10 million (the estimated price tag for naming rights to the building formerly known as the Sears Tower)?
A second, and, in my opinion, more interesting question: how does a media buyer cost-justify naming rights to a building? Do they consider that every time someone refers to it, it’s a “brand impression”? Some tourists from Milwaukee drive through Chicago: “Look, Mikey, there’s the Starbucks Tower.” Joe takes Flat Stanley to work, posts photos on his blog, and links to starbuckstower.com. Right there, three impressions! (Joe, you should start charging for these references!) A bomb threat at the Starbucks Tower makes national news, it becomes a landmark in the latest street racing video game, it’s featured on postcards that are mailed all over the world. Countless name exposures.
But does anyone buy a latte at Starbucks because of the Starbucks Tower? This is why I can’t figure out the cost justification.
Loosely related, last week I saw a clock where 7UP logos had replaced 12, 3, 6, and 9. It made me think of the corporate sponsorship of *moments*–“this home run brought to you by…” Is anything not for sale?
Everything is for sale, let’s face it.
I seem to recall a movie where your beloved Space Needle had a wonderful, large Starbucks logo on it. 🙂 It also doubled as one of Dr Evil’s lairs.
I am not a big fan of naming rights either, but look at it this way: for years, private benefactors have donated money to schools and hospitals to have wings and libraries named for them, so why not put a corporate name on a stadium? We’re a capitalist society, so isn’t that logical?
Any name exposure is good exposure, to paraphrase the old saying. That being said, there’s always Enron Stadium, Conseco Fieldhouse, 3Com Park, and all the other venues that are or were named for successful, honest, and gonna-be-around-forever corporations.
For what it’s worth, US Cellular Field will always be Comiskey Park, and Sears Tower will always be Sears Tower.
And for the right level of contribution, this blog could be called “I Was Telling Lisa