Arena Naming Rights Less Than First Reported But Still The Richest Ever
When in 2007, the Nets and Barclays Bank announced their naming rights deal, reports were that it was for $20 million a year over 20 years, a record $400 million and equal to what Citibank was paying for the Mets new stadium.
But since, there's been plenty of indications that the financial aspects of the deal, never confirmed officially, have been cut...if they were ever that rich. Twice, in fact, during the long (and failed) litigation by critics, the original deal was revised.
The official 2009 prospectus for arena bonds noted the Barclays deal was $10 million a year over 20 years, half what was first reported, plus other unspecified direct payments to the team.
Now, the authoritative Sports Business Journal lists the lower figure in a report on rights, but notes as well that it's the largest ever for an NBA arena, $5 million more than the $195 million Marc Cuban got for the American Airlines Arena in Dallas...and that was over 30 years. It's also richer than all but seven NFL venues, SBJ reports.
- Naming rights deals - Sports Business Journal
- $10 million, not $20 million - John Brennan - Meadowland Matters
43 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Umm Whats going on in Russia?? People are losing it.
Russian media tycoon, Alexander Lebedev, attacks billionaire Sergei Polonsky on live TV (VIDEO)
LOL
They are just mimicking our great TV talk shows of the past, Morton Downy, Geraldo, Springer etc… Supposedly that happens all the time on Russian TV..
It’s kind of nice watching filthy rich guys beat the crap out of each other.
Largest deal ever?
What about Citi?
What about JP Morgan with MSG?
If this deal was cut in half, how is it the largest deal ever?
-Say man when I was growing up we wanted a Jacuzzi, we had to fart in the tub.
Largest ever for a company to paste their name on an arena?
But yeah, this pales in comparison to the deal MSG got from JPM-Chase. And that isn’t even a naming rights deal in the tradition sense.
They are a "Presenting Partner" no?
300MM over 10 Years, right?
-Say man when I was growing up we wanted a Jacuzzi, we had to fart in the tub.
Marquee Partner for ALL of MSG's properties, not just the Garden
“Madison Square Garden (NASDAQ: MSG) and JPMorgan Chase today announced a new, long-term marketing partnership. JPMorgan Chase will become MSG’s first-ever Marquee Partner, the preeminent multi-platform, multi-venue, multi-media partnership with MSG. This new marketing partnership provides JPMorgan Chase with an unparalleled level of access for its best customers and premier brand exposure across MSG’s properties and brands. The deal includes MSG’s iconic venues (Madison Square Garden, Theater at Madison Square Garden, Radio City Music Hall, Beacon Theatre, Chicago Theatre), entertainment brands and events (Radio City Christmas Spectacular), professional sports teams (New York Knicks, New York Rangers, New York Liberty), regional television networks (MSG, MSG Plus), and digital platforms.
Also the story is about what SBJ reported and they did not include the MSG partnership, not sponsorship.
Thanks for clearing up
-Say man when I was growing up we wanted a Jacuzzi, we had to fart in the tub.
Oder was right all along
It seems as if Oder was right about how much the naming rights the whole time. The last time he made the claim that it was less was from adding a part of the deal that wasn’t even part of it just to make it seem as if it was doubled. Nevertheless, here is what he had to say about, which I am surprised that it wasn’t posted here originally.
http://atlanticyardsreport.blogspot.com/2011/09/sports-business-journal-confirms.html
that in spite of Oder’s claim that we repeatedly cited the $400 million figure, we did it exactly three times after 2009 when questions began to be raised and in both cases we were reflecting others’ reports.
More than a year ago, we also cited our own skepticism…to wit:
"The total value of the Barclays deal has never been made public. The entity that controls the arena—now owned 55% by Ratner and 45% by Prokhorov— will ultimately get $200 million from Barclays over 20 years, but Brett Yormark has said the team also gets some money from Barclays as part of the overall package. Originally, the deal was supposed to yield $400 million (although that number was never officially confirmed). It went through several revisions as delays mounted. Under terms of the agreement, Barclays doesn’t start paying until the arena opens."
Fuzzy math
First off, this has nothing to do with Bush, so don’t take it for that. Sometime certain figures can produce different results by playing them around or using what isn’t supposed to be used. For example, it was found out 1,500 construction jobs for the course of 10 years is not the same as saying 15,000 jobs, because this is not a multiplacation thing. In the case of the naming rights, the other half wasn’t supposed to be added in, it was completely seperate. Oder determined the actual claim from actually looking through those numbers and determining them, he didn’t come up with them arbitrairly just like how he came up with other findings on this project in terms of costs or even certain units. I do believe that he is owed an apology for being wrong on this when he wasn’t.
by Tal Barzilai on Sep 19, 2011 8:18 PM EDT up reply actions
run-on sentences
and you lost. Arena is rising. Court case is being appealed and will be overturned.
you lost.
you lost.
you lost
you lost.
by Net Income on Sep 19, 2011 11:39 PM EDT up reply actions 3 recs
According to whom?
Just because the ESDC is filing an appeal, doesn’t mean that it will be overturnned or even heard. Just recently, one of the Supreme Court judges that ruled in favor of Kelo vs New London did apologize for making that ruling, but if I was one of those living on that land I would say this, “That is too little, too late.” In the end, Pfizer wound up never building anything there and left the area vacant. For the most part, the rest of the project many never get built. BTW, saying that I lost four times doesn’t make you smarter, and neither that one liner by you, nets14. Keep in mind that Oder has also been known for determining other findings by crunching other numbers. BTW, here is what was said about Kelo, and I wonder what one of the judges will say to DG about upholding his ruling.
by Tal Barzilai on Sep 21, 2011 8:38 PM EDT up reply actions
OT- A bunch of Dwill highlight videos were just put up on youtube
Dwill (Jazz) vs Warriors- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taEQ7niHaz8
Dwill (Jazz) vs Warriors- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRpqpq5Oq1w
Dwill (Nets) vs Knicks- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cFk1kE8eWg
Dwill (Jazz) vs Lakers- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cFk1kE8eWg
The man is a beast!
by dwill8brooklynbound on Sep 19, 2011 5:15 PM EDT reply actions 2 recs
Sorry
this is Jazz vs Lakers- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEkTqUdKAbE
And this is Jazz vs Magic- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tf3rDnlvInQ&feature=related
by dwill8brooklynbound on Sep 19, 2011 5:23 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
man this lockout needs to end!
watching those got me excited for the season again
Jeffrey Sutton 2.0
That Net game and the Warrior and Magic games
were all with broken wrists. Imagine this guy when he’s full healthy.
by JerseysFinest. on Sep 19, 2011 9:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Could this mean Ratner needs more money, which would open the dor wider for Wang/Islanders
by Danbury Islanders Fan on Sep 19, 2011 5:50 PM EDT reply actions
Ratner needing money? When is that never the case?
Niners,Nets,Reds & USC!!!
The Most Interesting Man In The World---->Mikhail Prokhorov!!!
by Kidd2Petrovic on Sep 19, 2011 7:28 PM EDT up reply actions
Just more subsidies
He has a whole history of demanding both the city and state giving him subsidies to help him. This isn’t something new here. He even did that for MTC, and it was found to be nothing but a failure, so to help him, the government had to locate many of their agencies there to bail him out. On a related note, FCE as a whole is known for manipulating either city or state governments to give them subsidies even if they didn’t need them. In this economy, it’s not a good idea to subsidize those that hardly even give their fair share of taxes when those on the lower incomes are forced to give almost everything, while they give next to nothing. This is why I am against giving my tax dollars to help a rich man become richer. If he really thinks it’s a such a good idea, then he should pay for it himself rather than ask the city or state to do it for him, and the same goes for any other sports owner and businessman in that matter.
by Tal Barzilai on Sep 19, 2011 8:59 PM EDT up reply actions
Other way around
Actually, it didn’t work out, and he actually hurt Brooklyn. Believe it or not, subsidizing the rich is a burden to the country, not a benefit. Why should they be allowed so many tax breaks while the rest suffer. Obama is right about saying that the rich should pay their fair share as is Warren Buffet. Don’t try to use that end justifies the means claim, because I don’t buy it, and if it’s a privately owned project, the developer should pay for it themselves. Just hearing that makes me feel that you like subsidizing the rich, which is why you wouldn’t mind giving so much to Ratner no matter how much he asks for. Therefore, here is the question again, and I will keep on asking it until you answer it. I will like to ask if you actually do support using your tax dollars to make a rich man richer?
by Tal Barzilai on Sep 21, 2011 8:45 PM EDT up reply actions
michelle beadle "momma could have a ring on this finger tomorrow kno this !!" lol
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:6993527
speaking before you think can have severe consequences, however doing it in reverse can have beautiful results!
To makes matters worse
Unfortunately, the MTA is facing deficits and will take anything that they feel will generate money for them to get it no matter what. However, whatever they want to have isn’t free at all. It’s sort of complex to understand that. If the MTA is really about wanting money, then perhaps they would have had more if they took the Extell bid instead especially when Garry Barnett, who heads that company, did offer triple what Ratner did but was rejected despite that, plus he was not even allowed to meet with the MTA either.
by Tal Barzilai on Sep 19, 2011 8:53 PM EDT up reply actions
Just asking?
Why is it instead of actually debating about the issue, you guys resort to ganging up and attacking me? I find that very uncalled for, and I cannot believe that NetsDaily does next to nothing to stop these, but does it whenever I respond. It’s sort of like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict here along with the UN. If you guys act, like how Hamas does terrorist attacks on Israel, a blind eye is turnned and the attacks are almost justified. If any actions are taken, it’s nothing but a slap on the wrist. If I try to respond back to stop the attacks, like Israel does whenever they get attacks, I get condemned, and it’s called a crime against nature, and I get the warnings and sileneces despite the fact that I am not solely responsible for my actions. Is being against the move to Brooklyn a crime here? Apparantly, it is to those who tend to act fanatical on it. I try to be nice and kind to others, but hardly anyone is that way to me. If you have nothing nice to say, then don’t say anything at all instead of going a lot against one. Due to the fact that I am one person, it’s very easy to place any kind of blame on me especially since I have no alibies. You people really do hit below the belt. Just because I happen to disagree, doesn’t give you the right to attack me. Again, I have nothing against those that want to disagree with me, it’s those that attack me that I don’t like. You guys got to have your say, and you don’t hear me talking to like that or trying to stop you from viewing it that way, so let me have mine without having to get attacked like that. I could never understand why those who support this always have a tendency to feel so bent out of shape. There is a reason why I despise yesmen, and part of that is that they try to either deny or dismiss something that has been found false about who they are supporting, and then act very defensive on it. Please don’t get me the wrong way by reading this.
by Tal Barzilai on Sep 21, 2011 8:56 PM EDT up reply actions
Somewhat on topic
but this is a very, very smart move by the Nets. Building these playgrounds is not only improving the area and giving them a good rep when they actually move in, but they’re exposing these young kids to the Nets brand.
http://brooklyn.ny1.com/content/top_stories/147483/nets-score-big-with-new-school-playgrounds
by JerseysFinest. on Sep 20, 2011 12:43 AM EDT reply actions
Great point
Exposing themselves to a whole new generation of young fans
by djeterfan on Sep 20, 2011 1:01 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Hook em while they're young!
I thought about it last night, riding the train out of NY Penn around 7:30, as there was standing room only until the seacaucus stop (MNF at the new giants stadium). I realize that the more remote boroughs of NyC are starved for a legitimate sports franchise, especially in the winter months. Bringing a team into Brooklyn, they have a captive audience
Watch the video.
Very good.
I think it's fine.
by NetsMets4Life on Sep 20, 2011 7:01 AM EDT up reply actions

by 















