December 12, 2013
Who is Shyster?
Or you can search by:
Most Recent Comments
Mike Hargrove Interview (13)
Can they be the California Angels again? (9)
Another great moment in mass transit? (7)
Just another ten-percenter (his mind is like an ocean) (7)
Great Moments in Half-Baked Populism (8)
Shyster's Daily Circuit
Joe Posnanski Blog
Cot's Baseball Contracts
It IS About the Money
Baseball Think Factory
MLB Trade Rumors
Way Back and Gone
Bats -- NYT Baseball Blog
The Biz of Baseball
The Daily Fungo
The Common Man
Jorge Says No!
Baseball Over Here
Tuesday, February 03, 2009
New Shea StadiumIt could be closer than you think:
Citigroup Inc., eager to quell the controversy over how lenders are using government bailout money, is exploring the possibility of backing out of a nearly $400 million marketing deal with the New York Mets, say people familiar with the matter.
I'd be curious to see what kind of rights the Mets have under the marketing agreement. I presume that there is some sort of opt-out/buyout provision that would head off any lawsuits. But then again, if reasonable people were involved in all of this, the whole deal never would have happened in the first place.
Posted by Craig Calcaterra at 10:05am
I’m just sick of ballparks being named after companies, period. I think unless a ballpark is just in shambles, spending money on a new one is unconscionably irresponsible and frivolous.
Posted 02/03 at 12:22 PM
You don’t see Yankee Stadium participating in this nonsense. They’re holding out for WalMart stadium at 10% of gross revenues (of Walmart)
Posted 02/03 at 12:36 PM
Michael - Excellently and concisely put. Let the billionaires pay for their own toys.
Posted 02/03 at 12:36 PM
Pete Toms said...
I mentioned in a thread here yesterday that things have been strangely quiet re. the BofA deal with the Yankees…the last two paragraphs from today’s WSJ piece;
“Bank of America has been in talks with the New York Yankees about a major sponsorship deal for the new Yankee Stadium, though the company’s name wouldn’t be on the building. That deal appeared near complete in the fall, but neither side has discussed the matter since then.”
“Larry DiRita, a Bank of America spokesman, declined to comment on the company’s specific marketing arrangements. “These are normal banking relationships,” he said, noting that they are profitable for the bank.”
Times have changed, yes indeed…
Posted 02/03 at 01:27 PM
“no TARP capital will be used”
Do they really think we’re all stupid enough to misunderstand the concept of fungible assets?
Posted 02/03 at 01:51 PM
Yes, Rob. They really do. How often does a government agency say that the new tax/fee/lottery money is “only for education” or whatever?
Posted 02/03 at 02:20 PM
“It’s a TARP!”
- Admiral Ackbar
Posted 02/03 at 08:32 PM
Page 1 of 1
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
Next Post: Poe wanted to blog>> <<Previous Post: I hope they have something better than this