You're In The Agora
Welcome to the Net's best new source for commentary on current events, culture, faith, science and much more.
Faith
Confessing Evangelical Evangelical Outpost He Lives Mere Comments Mirror of Justice Religion Clause Three Hierarchies Science Dispatches from the Culture Wars In the Pipeline New Scientist Tierney Lab Liberty A Constrained Vision Asymmetrical Information Becker-Posner Blog Hit & Run Instapundit Positive Liberty The Agitator Volokh Conspiracy Economics Café Hayek EconLog Environmental Economics Freakonomics Free Exchange Greg Mankiw J. Bradfor DeLong Marginal Revolution The Right Andrew Sullivan Best of the Web Eunomia Hugh Hewitt Michelle Malkin Power Line The American Scene The Corner The Left After the Future Ezra Klein Matthew Yglesias Political Animal Talking Points Memo Errata Daniel Drezner Democracy in America Dilbert Blog Lilek's Bleat Overcoming Bias The Sartorialist Hoosiers Daily Contentions Indiana Barrister Masson's Blog Matthew Stevenson |
|
« New to the Web | Main | An Ecumencial Minimum Wage » January 16, 2007The Toyota Expressway?Square Dealer wrote last week about the intersection of public and commercial interests, with the proposal for ads on tollbooths as an example. Recently I thought of another example which I was surprised hasn't been implemented. It is now common practice to sell the naming rights for sports venues, convention centers, and other prominent buildings. Why, I wonder, aren't there any roads named by the highest bidder? In Philadelphia, I-76 is known as the Schuylkill Expressway, I-676 is the Vine St. Expressway, and I-476 west of the city is known as the Blue Route. Other cities have similar colloquialisms for traffic arteries, while others are named in honor of civic leaders. Sports venues used to be named in the same way, but now nearly all have corporate monikers. So why not sell the naming rights for major roadways? Perhaps federal funding for highway construction and maintenance is part of the reason. But come to think of it, perhaps most corporations don't want their names associated with "traffic jam" or "20-car pileup." Posted by Eric Seymour at January 16, 2007 12:26 PM CommentsYou gotta wonder, though, why so many corporations want their name associated with "1-11 record", "worst team in the league", etc. Seriously, though, the main reason stadium naming works is that the leagues can contractually require broadcasters to use the new name whenever they refer to the stadium, whereas traffic reporters and the like could continue to talk about the "Blue Route" or "Highway 101". A freeway near me is named the David Cherchuti freeway, after a policeman killed in the line of duty; but I only know that because I noticed a sign along the road. I've never heard that name mentioned on the radio; they always use the highway number. Posted by: wahoofive at January 17, 2007 11:38 AM | permalink To conclude, the economic value of a highway name for the advertiser would be a lot less than that of a stadium, since the highway name wouldn't come with any guarantee of publicity other than road signs. Posted by: wahoofive at January 17, 2007 01:01 PM | permalink leagues can contractually require broadcasters to use the new name whenever they refer to the stadium Out of curiosity, just how broad is the legal scope of these contractual requirements? It seems most logical that it would only apply during actual broadcasts of sporting events, though I suppose the contract could require that any media outlet which broadcasts any event would have to use the sponsored name at all times. If the latter is the case, I suppose other media sources (e.g. newspapers) would begin using the name for consistency and thus the sponsored name becomes universal. Posted by: Eric Seymour at January 17, 2007 01:46 PM | permalink I don't know anything about these contracts; I'm only supposing they exist. You're right that they probably only affect broadcasts from the stadium itself, but newspaper reporters need access to the press box too, which at least in theory could be withheld for any reason, and newspaper owners have their own reasons for staying friendly with big local advertisers. Furthermore, sponsors are usually allowed to put a huge logo on the stadium somewhere, which routinely shows up in aerial shots commonly taken, at least during football games. Posted by: wahoofive at January 17, 2007 04:17 PM | permalink I'm pretty sure you're right that there are some actual contracts involved. Overall, I agree with your point that stadium naming is more valuable. Posted by: Eric Seymour at January 18, 2007 09:12 AM | permalink Post a comment |
|
---- ADVERTISEMENTS ----
|