|
May 26, 2012
Who is Shyster?
Monthly Archives
November, 2009
October, 2009 September, 2009 August, 2009 July, 2009 June, 2009 May, 2009 April, 2009 March, 2009 February, 2009 January, 2009 December, 2008 November, 2008
Or you can search by:
Most Recent Comments
Mike Hargrove Interview (7)
Cole Hamels Meets Talk Radio (21) Just another ten-percenter (his mind is like an ocean) (5) The Waiting Game (10) Rules = Destiny (1) Shyster's Daily Circuit
Rob Neyer
AaronGleeman.com Joe Posnanski Blog Baseball Analysts Baseball Musings Cot's Baseball Contracts It IS About the Money Keith Law Cardboard Gods Baseball Think Factory MLB Trade Rumors Retrosheet Vegas Watch Way Back and Gone Bats -- NYT Baseball Blog The Biz of Baseball The Daily Fungo U.S.S. Mariner Braves Journal Scott Simkus The Common Man Jorge Says No! Baseball Over Here Fack Youk Wezen-Ball Chop-n-Change |
Baseball. Blogging. Whenever.Tuesday, February 03, 2009New 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 Comments
YankeesfanLen said...
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
GBS said...
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
Rob said...
“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
Mac said...
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
kendynamo said...
“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 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
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.