http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/23/bob-mcdonnell-virginia-governor-naming-rights_n_1224623.html
(If one of our resident repub-a-dub-dubs wants to provide a more fair and balanced link, go ahead.)
That ultimate expression of Federal totalitarianism, the MUTCD, would restrict interchange and minor bridge names to small signs, but could even it keep signs from exercising their right to speak the name of the road?
To use a concrete example, say they renamed the Fairfax County Parkway to Ron Paul 2016 Expressway (thanks to one of those dangerous 'moneybombs'). Would VDOT be allowed to post this name on signs on I-66? If Cal Rogers bought namiing rights to the James River Bridge (from his book proceeds, obviously), could VDOT post that name everywhere on roads that lead to the bridge, even where James River Bridge isn't currently signed?
Quote from: NE2 on January 23, 2012, 07:40:43 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/23/bob-mcdonnell-virginia-governor-naming-rights_n_1224623.html
(If one of our resident repub-a-dub-dubs wants to provide a more fair and balanced link, go ahead.)
That ultimate expression of Federal totalitarianism, the MUTCD, would restrict interchange and minor bridge names to small signs, but could even it keep signs from exercising their right to speak the name of the road?
To use a concrete example, say they renamed the Fairfax County Parkway to Ron Paul 2016 Expressway (thanks to one of those dangerous 'moneybombs'). Would VDOT be allowed to post this name on signs on I-66? If Cal Rogers bought namiing rights to the James River Bridge (from his book proceeds, obviously), could VDOT post that name everywhere on roads that lead to the bridge, even where James River Bridge isn't currently signed?
This is a dumb idea. A highway needs a name that is as permanent as possible, so that motorists don't have to learn a new name every year or every few years.
Completely ridiculous and idiotic idea...
Quote from: NE2 on January 23, 2012, 07:40:43 PM
If one of our resident repub-a-dub-dubs...
Can't we do better than this? If I wanted to discuss things like a 12-year-old, I'd log on to my son's Ben 10 wiki.
Quote from: qguy on January 24, 2012, 04:38:35 AM
Quote from: NE2 on January 23, 2012, 07:40:43 PM
If one of our resident repub-a-dub-dubs...
Can't we do better than this? If I wanted to discuss things like a 12-year-old, I'd log on to my son's Ben 10 wiki.
Internet = serious business
As a theoretical matter, I wouldn't mind it terribly much except for the point "Beltway" raises. Look at how often stadium names have been changing since the corporate naming became routine (the Miami Dolphins' stadium being the most frequently changed, though far from the only one). As a result, many people ignore the corporate names (Candlestick Park was always Candlestick Park to most fans even when the official name was Monster Park, for example). One reason why some of the college bowl games dropped the "traditional" names (such as the Peach Bowl becoming the Chik-Fil-A Bowl) is that when the sponsor name is part of the bowl title (Mazda Gator Bowl) nobody uses the sponsor's name (everyone continued to call it the Gator Bowl. But when the sponsor keeps changing, the bowl doesn't really establish an identity–look at the one in Charlotte, which in ten years has been the Continental Tire Bowl, then the Meineke Car Care Bowl, and is now the Belk Bowl.
There is no reason to presume the same would not and could not happen to roads. While you can establish a contract, suppose companies merge and the "sponsor" name is dropped (as happened with MCI Center in DC, which is now Verizon Center). Or they go broke or get caught up in scandal (both apply in the case of Enron Field in Houston, which was the Astros' home and is now named Minute Maid Park). You can't go renaming a road all the time like that. This is one of the same reasons why most jurisdictions do not name roads after living people–imagine if Windermere, Florida, had named a street "Tiger Woods Avenue."
On the other hand, there are some roads that NOBODY refers to by name even if the road has a "formal" name (the Dulles Toll Road, for example, is officially the Hirst—Brault Expressway, and I-66 inside the Beltway is the Custis Memorial Parkway). In theory–and again, I'm saying this solely as a theoretical matter, and I'm also premising this point on ignoring the "renaming" problem mentioned above–I wouldn't consider the sale of the naming rights for those sorts of roads to be much of a problem because I don't think it would make a difference for practical purposes. I-66 is and will always be I-66, regardless of whether it suddenly becomes the Coca-Cola Highway or some such. But even there you get into two practical problems: (a) Where do you draw the line on what roads are and are not eligible for this sort of naming? (b) What about in other parts of the country where people insist on using names instead of numbers to refer to roads (New York City being the first example that pops to mind)? Regarding point (a), there are some roads that some people refer to by name and other people by number (US-50 in Northern Virginia, aka Arlington Boulevard, would be an example; so would NC-751, aka Academy Road, in Durham, NC). Do you say "Arlington Boulevard is too commonly-used a name to allow the sale"? If so, what's the standard for determining whether a name is "commonly-used"?
Incidentally, NE2's example of the Fairfax County Parkway is an example of a road that already has another name: In addition to the Fairfax County Parkway designation, it's also named the Jack Herrity Parkway for the former chairman of the Board of Supervisors who pushed hard to get the road built. I've never heard anyone, including the politicians who named it, refer to it by the Herrity designation. Everyone calls it the Fairfax County Parkway except for the radio traffic reporters, who call it "7100." Why would anyone assume that adding a THIRD (sponsor's) name would cause the public or the traffic reporters to use that name? If I were a sponsor, I'd be reluctant to pay my money if I knew nobody would call the road by that name, and if I knew that not even the traffic reporters would use it, I'd be even less likely to do this.
(Certainly giving directions wouldn't be made any easier if the radio called it "7100," the person giving directions said "the Fairfax County Parkway," and the sign said "AOL Expressway" or whatever.)
Terrible, terrible idea. I'm sick of this country selling out to the highest corporate bidder. I'm tired of sports arenas changing their names every 5 years. If this ever happens to highways, I will NEVER use the corporate name to refer to them. It was bad enough when Kentucky renamed their parkways after two-bit politicians who nobody outside of KY has even heard of.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages1.cpcache.com%2Fproduct%2F59909661v5_350x350_Front_Color-BlackWhite.jpg&hash=ee0aa6517b54528a0e3668ea74a88569fb70c90a)
Quote from: kphoger on January 24, 2012, 04:16:29 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages1.cpcache.com%2Fproduct%2F59909661v5_350x350_Front_Color-BlackWhite.jpg&hash=ee0aa6517b54528a0e3668ea74a88569fb70c90a)
[ne2]I still call it White Sox Park[/ne2]
I don't call it shit. Fuck baseball.
[trolling]Well I for one won't vote for him next year if this passes.[/trolling]
Quote from: Takumi on January 24, 2012, 05:29:13 PM
[trolling]Well I for one won't vote for him next year if this passes.[/trolling]
meh, voting is for those who lack know-how and fissionable materials.
I'm not opposed to the idea with one condition: that enough money is obtained up front (in trust) both to pay for the initial outlay of signage and to remove the signage at the end of the contract (or in the middle, should the entity cease to exist. The contract will explicitly stipulate that whoever funds the road will be responsible for upkeep of the signs (repair damaged signs, posts, etc.), and that the DOT will take down a damaged sign if it is not repaired within a week of being reported - at the expense of the money in the trust. If the funder wants more signs or replacement signs, those have to again be paid for up front, along with establishing a trust for future removal costs.
Basically, my tax dollars must be protected from anything related to such a scheme.
Quote from: InterstateNG on January 24, 2012, 08:50:07 AM
Quote from: qguy on January 24, 2012, 04:38:35 AM
Quote from: NE2 on January 23, 2012, 07:40:43 PM
If one of our resident repub-a-dub-dubs...
Can't we do better than this? If I wanted to discuss things like a 12-year-old, I'd log on to my son's Ben 10 wiki.
Internet = serious business
:rolleyes:
Nah, it's just that politics is one thing and political insults are another. Tired of it. Been there, done that.
But before anyone replies that I don't have to read the thread... I really don't care *that* much about it. Was jes' sayin'.
Carry on...
Wait, the topic of the the thread: Put me down in the "that's idiotic" column.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 24, 2012, 05:56:23 PM
Quote from: Takumi on January 24, 2012, 05:29:13 PM
[trolling]Well I for one won't vote for him next year if this passes.[/trolling]
meh, voting is for those who lack know-how and fissionable materials.
He was being snarky. Under Virginia law a governor cannot be elected to consecutive terms, though a former governor can be elected again to a non-consecutive later term (like Grover Cleveland). Last time that happened was Mills Godwin, who served four years as a Democrat in the 1960s, left office due to the term limit, and then was elected again four years later in the mid-1970s as a Republican.
Quote from: qguy on January 24, 2012, 04:38:35 AM
Quote from: NE2 on January 23, 2012, 07:40:43 PM
If one of our resident repub-a-dub-dubs...
Can't we do better than this? If I wanted to discuss things like a 12-year-old, I'd log on to my son's Ben 10 wiki.
If you can't handle "repub-a-dub-dubs" then maybe you should leave the internet.
Quote from: bugo on January 26, 2012, 10:13:33 PM
Quote from: qguy on January 24, 2012, 04:38:35 AM
Quote from: NE2 on January 23, 2012, 07:40:43 PM
If one of our resident repub-a-dub-dubs...
Can't we do better than this? If I wanted to discuss things like a 12-year-old, I'd log on to my son's Ben 10 wiki.
If you can't handle "repub-a-dub-dubs" then maybe you should leave the internet.
Okay, that's enough of that guys... take it to a political forum.
If this does happen, the uproar about businesses changing their promotional materials will probably drown it out. I'm not crazy about the idea, although I think it's going to reach new lows if say, the roadway by the Coca-Cola plant is renamed for Pepsi.
I sense a pissing contest that has nothing to do with politics, if this happens.
Remember, this would be nothing new. They can thank Michigan for starting this whole thing, with virtually all of its freeways named for the Detroit automotive industry: the Chevrolet-Buick Freeway in Flint, the Ransom E. Olds Freeway in Lansing, and the Walter P. Chrysler, Fisher and Edsel Ford Freeways in Metro Detroit. So it's been done before. However, there must be idiots running Virginia to want that kind of thing to happen.
I think the only place you would see these names would be on the signs. Mailing addresses wouldn't change. Local governments control those. For instance, in my town we have KY 11 as "Veterans Memorial Highway" as decreed by the state, but the mailing addresses are Highway 11 North and Highway 11 South, and they are generally known by the locals as "The New Road" and "Booneville Road."
And I doubt, too, that there would be problems with maps and GPSes since they generally use route numbers, not names.
Quote from: bugo on January 26, 2012, 10:13:33 PMIf you can't handle "repub-a-dub-dubs" then maybe you should leave the internet.
Who said anything about not being able to handle it? Sheesh. The Air Force flag to your left isn't just for show. As a former officer, I think I've proven my thick-skin bona fides as much as necessary. I really don't care as much as I guess I sounded like I did.
Anyway (before I get my hand admini-slapped), how would the naming work in practice? IOW, will there be a minimum length requirement? I can see it now: a different name (and attendant signs) every three or four exits. Some drivers won't know which way is up.
As we all well know, good highway design (including signage) is intended to minimize driver confusion. This seems custom-designed in the third circle of Hell to increase it.
I get the idea that no one will refer to anything by its name. Does anyone call that brief stretch of I-10 in Indio the Dr. June McCarroll Memorial Freeway? I thought not.
Hell, there are still people in St Louis that insist on calling I-64 "Highway Farty", and the designation was applied, what, forty years ago? Good luck getting anyone to keep up with the constant name changes.
No corporate name has any business on any road unless said road is principally home to said company's headquarters.
And never under any circumstance should a road be renamed.
Quote from: Duke87 on January 27, 2012, 08:29:02 PM
And never under any circumstance should a road be renamed.
Why do you hate Martin Luther King Jr.? Are you a racist? :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D
I realized that Orlando sort of has a case of this already. Republic Drive was extended north over I-4 into the Universal Orlando expansion and renamed Universal Boulevard.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/1996-09-20/news/9609191013_1_republic-universal-studios-main-entrance
Though in this case it appears that the existing businesses on Republic supported the change.
Yes, I certainly look forward to the day when I can drive on the Carnival Beachline, Bank Of America's Turnpike and Amway Expressway...not!
Quote from: DeaconG on January 27, 2012, 10:28:07 PM
Yes, I certainly look forward to the day when I can drive on the Carnival Beachline, Bank Of America's Turnpike and Amway Expressway...not!
You call it the Beachline, so why not?
Quote from: hbelkins on January 27, 2012, 09:57:27 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on January 27, 2012, 08:29:02 PM
And never under any circumstance should a road be renamed.
Why do you hate Martin Luther King Jr.? Are you a racist? :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D
What honestly bothers me about all the streets named "Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd" more than anything else is that it's too much of a mouthful and thus unwieldy as a name. I would go with "MLK Blvd" or "King Blvd" as a more practical alternative.
As a practical matter, people rarely use corporate names or politician names. In most places "the stadium" is just that "the stadium", perhaps modifed by "the (team name) stadium". Corporate naming rights are mostly just ego deals for the sponsoring entity, often coming with lots of tickets and such, which would not be applicable to highways, where "ticket" is a bad thing.
If you renamed I-81 in Virginia the "Coca-Cola Expressway", people are going to call it "I-81". Road are almost always called by number, or, among native old-timers, by project names (Corridor G, Cross-County Highway, "the beltway", etc). In the absence of a need to differentiate its just "the interstate", "the turnpike", "the bypass" etc. If you are in a Harrisonburg, VA, the first words in directions will be "get on 'the' interstate" and go ..." because there is no need to say "81".
Silly idea.
Quote from: Duke87 on January 28, 2012, 10:41:25 AM
Quote from: hbelkins on January 27, 2012, 09:57:27 PM
Quote from: Duke87 on January 27, 2012, 08:29:02 PM
And never under any circumstance should a road be renamed.
Why do you hate Martin Luther King Jr.? Are you a racist? :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D
What honestly bothers me about all the streets named "Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd" more than anything else is that it's too much of a mouthful and thus unwieldy as a name. I would go with "MLK Blvd" or "King Blvd" as a more practical alternative.
MLK tends to be used as the abbreviation in most places, in terms of common speech or traffic reports.
Quote from: SP Cook on January 28, 2012, 11:07:32 AM
As a practical matter, people rarely use corporate names or politician names. In most places "the stadium" is just that "the stadium", perhaps modifed by "the (team name) stadium". Corporate naming rights are mostly just ego deals for the sponsoring entity, often coming with lots of tickets and such, which would not be applicable to highways, where "ticket" is a bad thing.
I think stadia are a bad example. Those actually do get referred to by corporate name. In NJ you had Brendan Byrne Area, Continental Airlines Arena, IZOD Center, and people went with it. Citi Field is one a lot of people still call Shea (myself included), but I'm unaware of a part of the country where new stadium names are actually ignored.
Quote from: DeaconG on January 27, 2012, 10:28:07 PM
Amway Expressway...
I don't see the problem with an Amway Expressway, it would be one large trunkline that would branch out into other toll roads which would pay back the original road, but be of average quality, and keep branching out into smaller toll roads which then recruit more roads to pay for roads that would have to float bonds to be paid for it, but those bonds would be approved in hotel conference rooms paid for by more bonds. And then we'd call it a QixStar Memorial Highway, and would replace Highway Advisory Radio with ways to improve your sales pitch and VMS boards to tell your status within the highway...but you'd never reach any promised destinations.
Quote from: qguy on January 27, 2012, 03:53:40 PM
Who said anything about not being able to handle it? Sheesh. The Air Force flag to your left isn't just for show. As a former officer, I think I've proven my thick-skin bona fides as much as necessary. I really don't care as much as I guess I sounded like I did.
With all due respect, your military service doesn't impress me. Yes, some military jobs are very tough and dangerous, but some are no different from regular jobs. I'm not a military worshiper. The soldiers in WW2 were admirable, but every war since then has been unnecessary and usually illegal. And soldiers on both sides of the war commit atrocities (Vietnam, anyone? Abu Ghraib?) I'm not trying to insult you, but I don't see the difference between most military jobs and most civilian jobs.
Quote from: qguy on January 27, 2012, 03:53:40 PMAnyway, how would the naming work in practice? IOW, will there be a minimum length requirement? I can see it now: a different name (and attendant signs) every three or four exits. Some drivers won't know which way is up.
As we all well know, good highway design (including signage) is intended to minimize driver confusion. This seems custom-designed in the third circle of Hell to increase it.
I decided to try to ignore all the party-political garbage that has been spouted and try to get a handle on how much revenue a sale of naming rights might bring.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naming_rights
The biggest actual figure mentioned in the article, which applies to two stadiums, is $20 million a year for 20 years, or $400 million total for each of two facilities (Citi Field and Barclays Stadium). Speculation has it that naming rights for the Meadowlands Stadium (MetLife Stadium?) will bring in $25 million-$30 million annually.
Considering that $20 million will pay for several miles of pavement reconstruction or a new service interchange, I don't think the sale of naming rights for highways can be dismissed out of hand as a potential revenue source. But I think the pragmatic objections others have mentioned are important, not just for reasons of safety and public acceptance, but also because they affect the value of the naming rights themselves.
* Unlike a stadium, the venues where naming rights can be exercised on a highway are severely limited.
* In contradistinction to athletic facilities, which are venues for paid entertainment, highways are seen more neutrally as conduits. This perception tends to turn negative in the case of highways which are frequently subject to congestion. Why would a company pay to risk besmirching its brand by association? (Another way to look at the distinction is this: baseball games watched live in a stadium are special events and tend to be remembered as such, while for most people driving down a highway is a quotidian activity.)
* A sale of naming rights could lead to pressure on a state DOT to undertake improvements (to sweeten the pot for the buyer of naming rights) which would not be programmed if an equal quantity of new revenue came from a traditional source like the fuel tax.
* The motoring public has a reasonable expectation of continuity and durability in highway names. This could further depress prices for naming rights of highways, since it requires the buyers to sacrifice flexibilities they enjoy with naming rights in other contexts, such as short-term contracts, the ability to transfer unused tenure in a naming-rights agreement to a third party, etc.
* In the typical stadium naming-rights scenario, both the buyer of the naming rights and the owner of the stadium are private entities. In an unrefined highway naming-rights scenario, the buyer would be private while the incumbent would be in the public sector. In comparison to private companies, public entities cannot do certain things without acting
ultra vires or breaking the law, and they also cannot be bound effectively by contract to undertake certain other activities. This is because there are typically some limitations on the abilities of public agencies (and their officials) to sue and be sued. Realistically, sale of naming rights would probably have to be delegated to a private-sector shell company in much the same way as the LOGO program, and this company would need some float in order to meet its contract obligations. This would dilute the potential revenue gains from sale of naming rights.
Proposals such as this are not always serious--often they are floated to demonstrate due diligence in formulating policy and also to make traditionally unattractive options, like increasing the fuel tax, seem more palatable. I seriously doubt any detailed thought has gone into how a sale of naming rights could be effectuated for highways.
Quote from: formulanone on January 28, 2012, 11:37:28 AM
Quote from: DeaconG on January 27, 2012, 10:28:07 PM
Amway Expressway...
I don't see the problem with an Amway Expressway, it would be one large trunkline that would branch out into other toll roads which would pay back the original road, but be of average quality, and keep branching out into smaller toll roads which then recruit more roads to pay for roads that would have to float bonds to be paid for it, but those bonds would be approved in hotel conference rooms paid for by more bonds. And then we'd call it a QixStar Memorial Highway, and would replace Highway Advisory Radio with ways to improve your sales pitch and VMS boards to tell your status within the highway...but you'd never reach any promised destinations.
:-D :nod: :spin:
You are my hero!
Thanks, DeaconG!
--------------
Could we drop the political bullshitting already? Because I pay people to do it professionally on a daily basis...
Quote from: NE2 on January 27, 2012, 11:14:45 PM
Quote from: DeaconG on January 27, 2012, 10:28:07 PM
Yes, I certainly look forward to the day when I can drive on the Carnival Beachline, Bank Of America's Turnpike and Amway Expressway...not!
You call it the Beachline, so why not?
People in Brevard County call it that with a snarl. It will ALWAYS be the Bee Line to me-with a rocking shield to boot!
Quote from: J N Winkler on January 28, 2012, 01:10:12 PM
I decided to try to ignore all the party-political garbage that has been spouted and try to get a handle on how much revenue a sale of naming rights might bring.
And YOU are MY hero.
Quote from: DeaconG on January 28, 2012, 01:13:37 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 27, 2012, 11:14:45 PM
Quote from: DeaconG on January 27, 2012, 10:28:07 PM
Yes, I certainly look forward to the day when I can drive on the Carnival Beachline, Bank Of America's Turnpike and Amway Expressway...not!
You call it the Beachline, so why not?
People in Brevard County call it that with a snarl. It will ALWAYS be the Bee Line to me-with a rocking shield to boot!
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpsroads.net%2Froads%2Ffl%2Ffl_528%2Fbeeline.jpg&hash=e73536f46a78ea05f6184c8bc3fb8d32baaeaea5)
Quote from: Duke87 on January 27, 2012, 08:29:02 PM
No corporate name has any business on any road unless said road is principally home to said company's headquarters.
Even then, I don't really like it. "Transamerica Conglomerated Enterprise, 1 Transamerica Conglomerate Road" is a really cheesy address. Plus if Transamerica ever vacates that building, it would probably have to be renamed.
There are two streets in northern McClain County, OK branching off of OK-9. One was named Bank Dr. and used to go to a bank, and the other is named Sonic Dr., which goes to a Sonic. The bank that Bank Dr. went to has been torn down, so the powers that be hastily renamed it "Bankers Dr."
Quote from: bugo on January 28, 2012, 12:16:19 PMWith all due respect, your military service doesn't impress me.
Not trying to impress you. Think what you want.
My point was that I'm no shrinking violet. My ears don't burn when I hear insults. What I meant to illustrate by my military service was that I'm no stranger to coarse language. Because the military probably has more coarse language than most sectors of American society. (I've been around.) Not everyone in the military curses a lot, but if they do they typically can curdle milk in the glass, peel paint off walls, etc.
Oddly enough, you don't hear much political insults in the military. Not even ribbing. There are both conservatives and liberals aplenty (admittedly many more conservatives), but when your life depends on the guy (or girl) next to you, you don't care much about their politics (or color, etc.), just whether or not they can get the job done so you can all get home safe.
But thanks for you opinion just the same.
BTW, next time you're tempted to use the phrase "with all due respect," remember that it always reveals that the user really doesn't think much respect is due at all.
Yes, admin, I know I'm *way* far afield from the topic at hand, so I'll speak of it no more. (With all due– uh, nevermind. :biggrin:)
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 28, 2012, 07:08:15 PM
Plus if Transamerica ever vacates that building, it would probably have to be renamed.
Only according to this crazy modern philosophy we have where naming rights have been monetized. Chrysler has had no presence in the Chrysler Building for decades and yet nobody has seen a need to change the name. More than can be said about the idiots at Willis Holdings.
Quote from: Upside down frog in a triangle on January 28, 2012, 11:34:48 AM
I think stadia are a bad example. Those actually do get referred to by corporate name. In NJ you had Brendan Byrne Area, Continental Airlines Arena, IZOD Center, and people went with it. Citi Field is one a lot of people still call Shea (myself included), but I'm unaware of a part of the country where new stadium names are actually ignored.
I think NYC metro may be a bad example. It is big enough to have multiple teams and multiple arenas. So, you have to call different places something.
However, even in most major league cities, there is one of each type of venue. "Going to the game" is sufficient, because there is one team in each sport and one venue. It can thus be "the stadium" "the park" "the arena/fieldhouse/civic center/etc" and communicate effectivly among locals. Even concerts, because these will always be at the one and only venue of that form in the metro area. i.e. "KISS is playing at the arena on the 23rd".
Quote from: SP Cook on January 29, 2012, 08:18:21 AM
Quote from: Upside down frog in a triangle on January 28, 2012, 11:34:48 AM
I think stadia are a bad example. Those actually do get referred to by corporate name. In NJ you had Brendan Byrne Area, Continental Airlines Arena, IZOD Center, and people went with it. Citi Field is one a lot of people still call Shea (myself included), but I'm unaware of a part of the country where new stadium names are actually ignored.
I think NYC metro may be a bad example. It is big enough to have multiple teams and multiple arenas. So, you have to call different places something.
However, even in most major league cities, there is one of each type of venue. "Going to the game" is sufficient, because there is one team in each sport and one venue. It can thus be "the stadium" "the park" "the arena/fieldhouse/civic center/etc" and communicate effectivly among locals. Even concerts, because these will always be at the one and only venue of that form in the metro area. i.e. "KISS is playing at the arena on the 23rd".
I've traveled all over this country. I watch sports play from all different venues, in cities big and small. So actually, while my example is local, my concept is not. Most every place I've been, the venue is called out by the name of its current sponsor.
Here in Chicago, many lifelong residents I know now refer to Comiskey as "The Cell". I believe its because the announcers do. So, along those lines, corporations will have to get the traffic news reporters to start calling highways by the sponsor names. People here call certain interstates by their names, the Ike, Dan Ryan, Kennedy, tollway, etc.
In Nashville, we've had many changes in a short period of time with both main venues due to non-payment of fees by the title sponsor.
I'm pretty sure that the football stadium is referred to by its current "corporate" name of LP Field. (Now, LP actually stands for Louisiana-Pacific, but it's very appropriate for this town as an abbreviation!)
As for the arena, I'm not sure how many people actually call it by its current name of Bridgestone Arena. My brother and I simply refer to it as "The Arena" or "Nashville Arena" due to the many changes, but I don't really know whether this is just us or not.
As for highways, I think it's silly especially if it works like it sometimes does in NASCAR. For example, Verizon and AT&T cannot sponsor cars at the top level sponsored by rival Sprint.
i.e. If we have the "Pizza Hut Freeway," will Papa Johns be blocked from advertising along it?
Strangely enough, paid naming rights to a highway is one thing Texas has NOT brought up as a source of transportation funding.
Quote from: Duke87 on January 28, 2012, 08:41:15 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 28, 2012, 07:08:15 PM
Plus if Transamerica ever vacates that building, it would probably have to be renamed.
Only according to this crazy modern philosophy we have where naming rights have been monetized. Chrysler has had no presence in the Chrysler Building for decades and yet nobody has seen a need to change the name. More than can be said about the idiots at Willis Holdings.
Well, if I own a company and I buy the building after Transamerica moves out, am I really going to want to include "One Transamerica Drive" on my letterhead? I don't want my customers to associate my company with anything Transamerica has done, I want them to think about what my company has done. Especially if Transamerica is a shitty company, and their name on my letterhead drags my brand down.
Plus on a personal note it would bother me because at that point the street has nothing to do with Transamerica, but then nobody has probably ever seen an asp on Asp Avenue here, so I guess I could just get over that.