According to this Chicago Tribune article (http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/columnists/ori/ct-biz-john-hancock-center-name-ryan-ori-20180212-story.html), the city's second-best known skyscraper will no longer be known as the John Hancock Center; instead, it is now 875 N. Michigan, after its address. This comes 10 years after the erstwhile Sears Tower became the Willis Tower. The full article is below:
QuoteThe John Hancock Center is getting a name change, nearly a decade after another of Chicago's most beloved skyscrapers – the Sears Tower – switched identities and caused a civic uproar.
Owners of the 100-story John Hancock Center said the building's namesake, the insurance company that built the tower almost five decades ago, asked that its name and logos throughout the building's interior be removed immediately.
The Hancock is the city's fourth-tallest building, at 1,128 feet.
For now the building will be known by its address, 875 N. Michigan Ave., as the owner seeks a new naming-rights deal, said Stephen Hearn, president and CEO of Hearn Co.
Chicago-based Hearn is part of a group of real estate investors that has owned the office and parking portions of the building since 2013.
John Hancock removed its name from the 62-story John Hancock Tower in Boston in 2015 after its last office lease in the building expired.
The insurer, which was acquired by Toronto-based Manulife Financial in 2004, hasn't been a tenant in Chicago's John Hancock Center for many years.
"As they did in Boston, they just decided to have their name removed," Hearn said. "At this point, we'll push harder for a replacement name. This property deserves a more important identity than simply the address."
John Hancock hasn't paid for the right to have its name on the modernist skyscraper since the last naming-rights contract expired shortly after the current owners bought it, Hearn said.
Manulife representatives did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Co. built the tower from 1965 to 1970. The building, designed by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, is known for its black, X-shaped braces.
The loss of the iconic name comes as Hearn decided to continue owning the property after exploring a potential sale. Hearn has decided to hold on to the property for at least another two or three years, meaning it will likely be the owner that signs a naming-rights deal.
Hearn and its investment partners, Mount Kellett Capital Management and San Antonio-based Lynd Co., bought their portion of the tower for $140 million in 2013. Mount Kellett is now an affiliate of New York-based Fortress Investment Group.
The group owns the 717-space parking garage on Floors 4 to 12 and about 908,000 square feet of offices on Floors 13 to 41.
The group invested about $69 million on building upgrades and signing new leases.
Other portions of the property – including residential condominiums, retail and restaurant space, broadcast antennas and the 360 Chicago observatory – are owned separately.
The Tribune reported last year that the office and parking owners were putting the property up for sale, with offers expected to potentially top $330 million.
But offers came in lower than hoped amid a continued slowdown in downtown Chicago office sales in 2017. Last year's downtown office sales volume was $2.2 billion, according to Jones Lang LaSalle, down from $2.5 billion in 2016. The past two years were down dramatically from a record $6.5 billion in sales in 2015.
Hearn said several factors, including uncertainty over future interest rates and the impact of new tax laws, slowed the potential sale of its building as well as other large office deals in Chicago.
"It all led to the notion that this isn't the right time for a sale," Hearn said.
The owners instead will look to refinance the property with a new loan, he said.
Hearn will continue talks for naming rights, which he said could be tied into a redevelopment of the ground-floor plaza. The plaza, parking garage and naming rights are controlled by the office owner.
Hearn previously estimated naming rights could be worth $1.5 million or more annually.
Yet he said he realizes name changes should not be taken lightly, conscious that many Chicagoans refuse to refer to the former Sears Tower by its nearly decade-old moniker, Willis Tower.
Hearn declined to say whether he expected the building's new namesake to be a tenant in the building.
Circumstances at the Hancock differ from those that led to the Sears Tower becoming Willis Tower in 2009. In that deal, British insurance broker Willis Group Holdings acquired naming rights as part of an office lease.
In the Hancock's case, the building's namesake has asked for a change without a replacement in tow.
"We have turned away a number of interested parties because we didn't feel the name was appropriate for this iconic property," Hearn said. "I want to put an identity on this property that everyone in Chicago can be proud of."
This isn't going to go over well....
Right...
They still call the other building the "Sears Tower". Only reporters and those from out of town call it "Willis Tower".
It'll still be called the John Hancock Center just like the Willis Tower is still called the Sears Tower and Guaranteed Rate Field is still called Comiskey Park.
Quote from: Brandon on February 13, 2018, 11:53:27 AM
Right...
They still call the other building the "Sears Tower". Only reporters and those from out of town call it "Willis Tower".
It's quite simple: Stop naming ginormous monolithic things after corporate interests, and you won't have this problem. It also comes with the added benefit of avoiding untoward free publicity.
Quote from: formulanone on February 13, 2018, 01:24:01 PM
Quote from: Brandon on February 13, 2018, 11:53:27 AM
Right...
They still call the other building the "Sears Tower". Only reporters and those from out of town call it "Willis Tower".
It's quite simple: Stop naming ginormous monolithic things after corporate interests, and you won't have this problem. It also comes with the added benefit of avoiding untoward free publicity.
:clap:
Quote from: formulanone on February 13, 2018, 01:24:01 PM
Quote from: Brandon on February 13, 2018, 11:53:27 AM
Right...
They still call the other building the "Sears Tower". Only reporters and those from out of town call it "Willis Tower".
It's quite simple: Stop naming ginormous monolithic things after corporate interests, and you won't have this problem. It also comes with the added benefit of avoiding untoward free publicity.
It also saves you the embarrassment of having something named for a company that has long since gone under, such as Enron Field and Qualcomm Stadium, to name but two examples.
Quote from: abefroman329 on February 13, 2018, 03:10:06 PM
Quote from: formulanone on February 13, 2018, 01:24:01 PM
Quote from: Brandon on February 13, 2018, 11:53:27 AM
Right...
They still call the other building the "Sears Tower". Only reporters and those from out of town call it "Willis Tower".
It's quite simple: Stop naming ginormous monolithic things after corporate interests, and you won't have this problem. It also comes with the added benefit of avoiding untoward free publicity.
It also saves you the embarrassment of having something named for a company that has long since gone under, such as Enron Field and Qualcomm Stadium, to name but two examples.
But...$$$.
Who's really embarrassed?
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 13, 2018, 03:13:27 PM
Quote from: abefroman329 on February 13, 2018, 03:10:06 PM
Quote from: formulanone on February 13, 2018, 01:24:01 PM
Quote from: Brandon on February 13, 2018, 11:53:27 AM
Right...
They still call the other building the "Sears Tower". Only reporters and those from out of town call it "Willis Tower".
It's quite simple: Stop naming ginormous monolithic things after corporate interests, and you won't have this problem. It also comes with the added benefit of avoiding untoward free publicity.
It also saves you the embarrassment of having something named for a company that has long since gone under, such as Enron Field and Qualcomm Stadium, to name but two examples.
But...$$$.
Who's really embarrassed?
The team that plays there certainly should be.
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 13, 2018, 12:53:20 PM
It'll still be called the John Hancock Center just like the Willis Tower is still called the Sears Tower and Guaranteed Rate Field is still called Comiskey Park.
Speaking of Guaranteed Rate Field, I read a rumor that Wintrust Bank was going to purchase the naming rights and name it Wintrust Field at Comiskey Park, but they were beaten out due to some favorable connections between Reinsdorf and Guaranteed Rate.
As a lifelong Sox fan, calling it "the Grief" for short would be appropriate for the way the team is playing.
(https://i.imgflip.com/24iv09.jpg) (https://imgflip.com/i/24iv09)via Imgflip Meme Generator (https://imgflip.com/memegenerator)
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 13, 2018, 12:53:20 PMGuaranteed Rate Field
I've been out of the stadia naming loop for almost a decade now, so when I saw this last week while thumbing around Google Maps, I almost reported it as spam. It sounds like something the Greater Hazleton Chamber of Commerce would promote...
(https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2816/33577919146_f886fdd0db_b.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/TaaBws)
Removing the John Hancock tower removes a piece of Chicago IMO.
I have a suggestion. Rename it The Burnham Center after Daniel Burnham. It's not a corporate name, and it's something distinctly Chicago.
Quote from: abefroman329 on February 13, 2018, 03:10:06 PM
Quote from: formulanone on February 13, 2018, 01:24:01 PM
Quote from: Brandon on February 13, 2018, 11:53:27 AM
Right...
They still call the other building the "Sears Tower". Only reporters and those from out of town call it "Willis Tower".
It's quite simple: Stop naming ginormous monolithic things after corporate interests, and you won't have this problem. It also comes with the added benefit of avoiding untoward free publicity.
It also saves you the embarrassment of having something named for a company that has long since gone under, such as Enron Field and Qualcomm Stadium, to name but two examples.
Enron and Qualcomm bought naming rights for things they had no relationship with. Sears and John Hancock actually utilized the things named for them.
When the Reds opened Great American Ballpark, I had no idea there was actually a company named Great American. I thought the Reds were just bragging about their ballpark.
Quote from: SectorZ on February 14, 2018, 08:59:45 AM
Quote from: abefroman329 on February 13, 2018, 03:10:06 PM
Quote from: formulanone on February 13, 2018, 01:24:01 PM
Quote from: Brandon on February 13, 2018, 11:53:27 AM
Right...
They still call the other building the "Sears Tower". Only reporters and those from out of town call it "Willis Tower".
It's quite simple: Stop naming ginormous monolithic things after corporate interests, and you won't have this problem. It also comes with the added benefit of avoiding untoward free publicity.
It also saves you the embarrassment of having something named for a company that has long since gone under, such as Enron Field and Qualcomm Stadium, to name but two examples.
Enron and Qualcomm bought naming rights for things they had no relationship with. Sears and John Hancock actually utilized the things named for them.
Sears vacated the Sears Tower 10 or 15 years before it was renamed.
Quote from: abefroman329 on February 13, 2018, 03:19:11 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 13, 2018, 12:53:20 PM
It'll still be called the John Hancock Center just like the Willis Tower is still called the Sears Tower and Guaranteed Rate Field is still called Comiskey Park.
Speaking of Guaranteed Rate Field, I read a rumor that Wintrust Bank was going to purchase the naming rights and name it Wintrust Field at Comiskey Park, but they were beaten out due to some favorable connections between Reinsdorf and Guaranteed Rate.
As a lifelong Sox fan, calling it "the Grief" for short would be appropriate for the way the team is playing.
I've always been a Sox fan but can't ever call it Guaranteed Rate Field, I too call it Comiskey still.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 14, 2018, 09:16:17 AM
When the Reds opened Great American Ballpark, I had no idea there was actually a company named Great American. I thought the Reds were just bragging about their ballpark.
WAIT WHAT
This sucks. Whats next, renaming Fenway Park after some sh*t company or something like that?
Quote from: abefroman329 on February 14, 2018, 10:47:57 AM
Quote from: SectorZ on February 14, 2018, 08:59:45 AM
Quote from: abefroman329 on February 13, 2018, 03:10:06 PM
Quote from: formulanone on February 13, 2018, 01:24:01 PM
Quote from: Brandon on February 13, 2018, 11:53:27 AM
Right...
They still call the other building the "Sears Tower". Only reporters and those from out of town call it "Willis Tower".
It's quite simple: Stop naming ginormous monolithic things after corporate interests, and you won't have this problem. It also comes with the added benefit of avoiding untoward free publicity.
It also saves you the embarrassment of having something named for a company that has long since gone under, such as Enron Field and Qualcomm Stadium, to name but two examples.
Enron and Qualcomm bought naming rights for things they had no relationship with. Sears and John Hancock actually utilized the things named for them.
Sears vacated the Sears Tower 10 or 15 years before it was renamed.
But is what was named WHILE they were in there.
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 14, 2018, 03:02:30 PM
This sucks. Whats next, renaming Fenway Park after some sh*t company or something like that?
Don't think that hasn't been talked about. http://www.masslive.com/redsox/index.ssf/2014/02/boston_red_sox_resist_urge_to.html
They do have areas within the stadium named, such as for Coca Cola, which probably keeps everyone in some sort of state of happiness for now.
Quote from: abefroman329 on February 13, 2018, 03:19:11 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 13, 2018, 12:53:20 PM
It'll still be called the John Hancock Center just like the Willis Tower is still called the Sears Tower and Guaranteed Rate Field is still called Comiskey Park.
Speaking of Guaranteed Rate Field, I read a rumor that Wintrust Bank was going to purchase the naming rights and name it Wintrust Field at Comiskey Park, but they were beaten out due to some favorable connections between Reinsdorf and Guaranteed Rate.
See that wouldn't be bad. I've seen fields named within stadiums like Brigham Field at Huskie Stadium in DeKalb. Guaranteed rate with a big red down arrow is possibly the worst public sign to see when entering a stadium of a competitive team.
Quote from: ET21 on February 14, 2018, 03:53:04 PM
Quote from: abefroman329 on February 13, 2018, 03:19:11 PM
Quote from: Flint1979 on February 13, 2018, 12:53:20 PM
It'll still be called the John Hancock Center just like the Willis Tower is still called the Sears Tower and Guaranteed Rate Field is still called Comiskey Park.
Speaking of Guaranteed Rate Field, I read a rumor that Wintrust Bank was going to purchase the naming rights and name it Wintrust Field at Comiskey Park, but they were beaten out due to some favorable connections between Reinsdorf and Guaranteed Rate.
See that wouldn't be bad. I've seen fields named within stadiums like Brigham Field at Huskie Stadium in DeKalb. Guaranteed rate with a big red down arrow is possibly the worst public sign to see when entering a stadium of a competitive team.
Yeah that would've been fine with me. The Georgia Tech football team (and, IIRC, for a time, Atlanta United) play on Grant Field at Bobby Dodd Stadium (not that it's ever referred to that way, either Grant Field or Bobby Dodd Stadium).
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 14, 2018, 03:02:30 PM
This sucks. Whats next, renaming Fenway Park after some sh*t company or something like that?
Or worse, Wrigley Field.
Quote from: abefroman329 on February 14, 2018, 05:56:29 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 14, 2018, 03:02:30 PM
This sucks. Whats next, renaming Fenway Park after some sh*t company or something like that?
Or worse, Wrigley Field.
It was named for the co-owner of the Cubs who also ran the chewing-gum company bearing his namesake.
Quote from: abefroman329 on February 14, 2018, 05:56:29 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 14, 2018, 03:02:30 PM
This sucks. Whats next, renaming Fenway Park after some sh*t company or something like that?
Or worse, Wrigley Field.
The prototypical example of a Named Stadium. I will say it does sound a lot classier than
National Rental Car Center.
Curiously, which other sponsored stadium has stuck around for at least two decades (a sad state of "permanence")?
Quote from: Big John on February 14, 2018, 07:30:02 PM
Quote from: abefroman329 on February 14, 2018, 05:56:29 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 14, 2018, 03:02:30 PM
This sucks. Whats next, renaming Fenway Park after some sh*t company or something like that?
Or worse, Wrigley Field.
It was named for the co-owner of the Cubs who also ran the chewing-gum company bearing his namesake.
Whoosh.
They could just say that the building is now named after John Hancock, signer of the Declaration of Independence, instead of John Hancock Insurance...
Quote from: formulanone on February 15, 2018, 12:13:19 AM
Quote from: abefroman329 on February 14, 2018, 05:56:29 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 14, 2018, 03:02:30 PM
This sucks. Whats next, renaming Fenway Park after some sh*t company or something like that?
Or worse, Wrigley Field.
The prototypical example of a Named Stadium. I will say it does sound a lot classier than National Rental Car Center.
Curiously, which other sponsored stadium has stuck around for at least two decades (a sad state of "permanence")?
Original Busch Stadium lasted well over 20 years and the new one likely will as well.
If you count that Chase bought Bank One, Chase Field in Arizona hits 20 this year
Coors Field is at 23
Tropicana Field is at 22
Raymond James Stadium hits 20 this year
Target Center is at 28
United Center is 24
If a stadium was built with mostly public funds, I think it should be named after the place it was built, or the primary tenant. Not some unrelated company.
TIL the John Hancock Center in Chicago is named after an insurance company and not an 18th-century gentleman who likes to sign his name in really large script.
I find it odd that said Insurance company could demand the name be removed from the building. Their logos, sure, but would it not have been trivial to keep the name and just declare it to be named after the same person the insurance company is named after? It's not like they can claim a trademark on the name of a historical figure.
Quote from: Duke87 on February 16, 2018, 12:19:35 AM
TIL the John Hancock Center in Chicago is named after an insurance company and not an 18th-century gentleman who likes to sign his name in really large script.
I find it odd that said Insurance company could demand the name be removed from the building. Their logos, sure, but would it not have been trivial to keep the name and just declare it to be named after the same person the insurance company is named after? It's not like they can claim a trademark on the name of a historical figure.
Don't forget Willis Tower ;)
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 14, 2018, 03:02:30 PM
This sucks. Whats next, renaming Fenway Park after some sh*t company or something like that?
Don't give John Henry any ideas.
Quote from: kkt on February 15, 2018, 12:53:07 PM
If a stadium was built with mostly public funds, I think it should be named after the place it was built, or the primary tenant. Not some unrelated company.
Although depending on the contract agreement, the stadium naming can help recoup some of those public funds spent.
Quote from: formulanone on February 15, 2018, 12:13:19 AM
Quote from: abefroman329 on February 14, 2018, 05:56:29 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 14, 2018, 03:02:30 PM
This sucks. Whats next, renaming Fenway Park after some sh*t company or something like that?
Or worse, Wrigley Field.
The prototypical example of a Named Stadium. I will say it does sound a lot classier than National Rental Car Center.
Curiously, which other sponsored stadium has stuck around for at least two decades (a sad state of "permanence")?
If Philips Arena in Atlanta hasn't been around for 20 years, it's very close. Ditto FedExField (yes, that's the proper rendering, no space between "Ex" and "Field).
Tropicana Field...probably?
Quote from: GreenLanternCorps on February 15, 2018, 12:04:01 PM
They could just say that the building is now named after John Hancock, signer of the Declaration of Independence, instead of John Hancock Insurance...
Frankly, I always assumed it was, and that the Hancock Center in Boston was named for the insurance company.
Quote from: cabiness42 on February 15, 2018, 12:28:47 PM
Quote from: formulanone on February 15, 2018, 12:13:19 AM
Quote from: abefroman329 on February 14, 2018, 05:56:29 PM
Quote from: Roadgeekteen on February 14, 2018, 03:02:30 PM
This sucks. Whats next, renaming Fenway Park after some sh*t company or something like that?
Or worse, Wrigley Field.
The prototypical example of a Named Stadium. I will say it does sound a lot classier than National Rental Car Center.
Curiously, which other sponsored stadium has stuck around for at least two decades (a sad state of "permanence")?
Original Busch Stadium lasted well over 20 years and the new one likely will as well.
If you count that Chase bought Bank One, Chase Field in Arizona hits 20 this year
Coors Field is at 23
Tropicana Field is at 22
Raymond James Stadium hits 20 this year
Target Center is at 28
United Center is 24
PacBell/SBC/AT&T Park in San Fran has to be up there. It has been sponsored by Pacific Bell, which was bought by SBC, which then bought AT&T and changed it's named to AT&T, hence now AT&T Park. I guess it hasn't been 20 years yet, as the stadium opened in 2000