Naming Rights Controversy Doesn’t Just Affect the Big Markets
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3162/2766555952_26888be681_m.jpg We’ve all heard or seen the big hullabaloo in the press about Citigroup’s and Bank of America’s lucrative stadium naming-rights deals with the New York Mets ($20 million a year) and Carolina Panthers ($7 million a year), respectively. The controversy stems from the fact that the two banks lead the pack among recipients of the feds’ Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). They’re each getting a $45-billion slice of the $700 billion bailout package, begging questions as to whether it’s appropriate for companies to continue paying for their names to be plastered on sporting venues, now that taxpayer money is being used to help keep these banks afloat.
With that sensitivity squarely in mind, Congressmen Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) and Ted Poe (R-Texas) have led the charge on Capitol Hill seeking Treasury Department intervention on the Citigroup deal.
On the surface, this would seem to have very little to do with us in the Myrtle Beach area (outside of Citigroup shareholders who happen to live here). At the end of the day, should we along the Grand Strand really care about the outcome of the Citigroup controversy?
In a word … yes. Because the immediate trickle-down effect could severely impact one of our very own corporate and community leaders.
Drive past the intersection of 21st Avenue North and Grissom Parkway, and you’ll see the home of the Myrtle Beach Pelicans. The Pelicans have been a solid example of a strong business model in recent years (even through a rough economy), and an active community partner that helps raise thousands of dollars each year to support local charities and social needs.
So why should the Pelicans be compromised by the fact that they play their games at BB&T Coastal Field? They might very well be, if Kucinich and Poe get their way.
BB&T is No. 18 on the TARP recipient list at $3.1 billion. And while the terms of the original licensing deal made by Costal Federal Bank are paltry in comparison ($100,000 annually over 10 years, according to Naming Rights Online), it begs the same question that Paul LaMonica raises in the aforementioned CNN.com piece:
“… if Citigroup has to renege on its deal, then where does it end?”
There are no comments posted. Add yours below.