# Naming Rights



## Blue Lou (Aug 4, 2007)

EDIT:

List (update 09-05-2013)
mil. USD / year

Etihad Stadium	24,00
Barclays Center	20,00
Citi Field	20,00
MetLife Stadium	16,00
Ricoh Arena	15,44
Levi's Stadium	11,02
Türk Telekom Arena	10,25
Barclays Center	10,00
Staples Center	10,00
Reliant Stadium	10,00
Philips Arena	9,25
Allianz Arena	7,89
Otkrytie Arena	7,89
Fed Ex Stadium	7,59
Sun Life Stadium	7,50
Allianz Parque	7,05
Bank of America Stadium	7,00
Gillette Stadium	7,00
Lincoln Financial Field	6,65
Veltins-Arena	6,58
Lucas Oil Stadium	6,10
Field at Mile High	6,00
Sports Authority Field	6,00
University of Phoenix Stadium	5,94
Signal-Iduna-Park	5,26
CenturyLink Field	5,00
M&T Bank Stadium	5,00
Commerzbank-Arena	3,95
EverBank Field	3,32
LP Field	3,00
Heinz Field	2,85
Allianz Nice Stadium	2,63
Edward Jones Dome	2,65
Raymond James 2,50
Ford Field	2,00
Mall of America Field	2,00
O.co Coliseum	1,20
Qualcomm Stadium	0,90











Hi,

Are there any lists comparing naming rights deals of various stadiums available? I have tried to search but can't find anything on here.

*England*
Arsenal - Emirates Stadium - £100m over 15 years (includes kit sponsorship)
Coventry - Ricoh Arena - £10m over ten years


----------



## ryebreadraz (Sep 4, 2008)

Los Angeles

Staples paid $100,000,000 over 20 years for the naming rights to Staples Center back in 1999.


----------



## Alemanniafan (Dec 15, 2008)

Here in Aachen, Germany the clubs Fans invest over 4.2 mio € into the new 50 mio € stadium project, to enable the club to keep the old stadiums name.
The club had a few offers from namesponsors, but decided it would be more beneficial not to sell the name and keep and attract more fans that way. 
The club also generates some more merchandising incomes with the traditional stadiumname now, by selling Tivoli clothes and other Tivoli fanware.

At least it's a good example for one of the few cases where namingrights were not beneficial enough so far, to compete with other possible ways. Not selling the name and keeping a "powerfull" and traditional name and using it as a brand has proven to be quite a good possibillity for a club to distinguish itself from the others here so far. Other stadia like the "Stadion im Borussiapark" in Mönchengladbach or the "MSV Arena" in Duisburg also didn't sucessfully find a namesponsor, but can't use a traditional name of the old stadium as a brand.
Dresden will also keep the old name for now, until the womens WC but ist trying to sell it for the time afterwards.


----------



## RobH (Mar 9, 2007)

We are Tottenham, super Tottenham, from the Naming Rights...


----------



## www.sercan.de (Aug 10, 2003)

Türk Telekom Arena:
10,250,000 USD / Year (+7,000,000 USD / year kit)
Total 10 years = 102,500,000 USD (+ 5 years kit 35,000,000)


----------



## BoulderGrad (Jun 29, 2005)

Seattle Area:
Key Arena (Formerly Seattle Center Arena): Key Bank
Qwest Field (Formerly Seahawks Stadium): Qwest Communications
Safeco Field: Safeco Insurance Corp.
Sho Ware Center (Formerly Kent Events Center): Sho Ware
Comcast Arena (Formerly Everett Events Center): Comcast Cable


----------



## Bigmac1212 (Nov 2, 2004)

Phoenix Area:
Jobing.com Arena: Jobing.com resume website
Chase Field: JP Morgan Chase
US Airways Center: US Airways
University of Phoenix Stadium: University of Phoenix school
Wells Fargo Arena (Arizona State basketball): Wells Fargo bank


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

Jobing.com Arena is an awful name. Another equally bad one comes courtesy of Toronto-Dominion, 'America's Most Convenient Bank': TD Banknorth Garden? YUCK!


----------



## en1044 (May 4, 2008)

Its just the TD Garden now.


----------



## koolio (Jan 5, 2008)

University of Phoenix Stadium is indeed quite a poor name for such an amazing facility. As an aside, I wonder why there are so many airline companies that sponsor arenas though. Airlines and Banks usually seem to dominate the naming rights market even though there are so many bigger corporations out there. Would love to know why that is.


----------



## WeimieLvr (May 26, 2008)

Philips Electronics paid $180 million for the naming rights to Philips Arena in Atlanta. http://www.nytimes.com/1999/02/03/business/philips-to-pay-180-million-to-name-new-atlanta-arena.html

The city's other major venues - the Georgia Dome (NFL) and Turner Field (MLB) - weren't whored out to any corporate pimps.


----------



## JimB (Apr 7, 2005)

Alemanniafan said:


> Here in Aachen, Germany the clubs Fans invest over 4.2 mio € into the new 50 mio € stadium project, to enable the club to keep the old stadiums name.
> The club had a few offers from namesponsors, but decided it would be more beneficial not to sell the name and keep and attract more fans that way.
> The club also generates some more merchandising incomes with the traditional stadiumname now, by selling Tivoli clothes and other Tivoli fanware.
> 
> ...


Yes. I think you're right to say that Aachen isn't a sufficiently big "brand" to be able to attract a sufficiently worthwhile naming rights deal.

It's only when the numbers get big that losing a long cherished stadium name becomes a price worth paying. For instance, I know that Spurs are hoping to sign a deal with a middle eastern or Asian company that will pay for the majority of their new stadium construction costs. That would be too good a deal to turn down.

The idea is that, in exchange for x number of years of stadium naming rights and shirt sponsorship, the company in question will hand Spurs a "gift in kind". That is, all the money will be paid up front - thereby eliminating the need for Spurs to take on any debt.

If Spurs are successful in this plan, I would expect it to become the model for quite a few other stadium naming rights deals.


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

en1044 said:


> Its just the TD Garden now.


That's much better, but the Boston Garden is what it is. There's a sizable number of people in Toronto that continue to call the Skydome, the Skydome. It's the name that was chosen by the public when the stadium was built. Rogers paid to have it changed to the Rogers Centre, but it should really be the public who decide what they want to call it, especially in a facility that they paid for.

Thankfully, some people in Toronto have realized that, and reverted back to the name Skydome.


----------



## koolio (Jan 5, 2008)

Rogers Centre was such a ridculous change of name. Should have went with something like Rogers SkyDome.


----------



## ryebreadraz (Sep 4, 2008)

koolio said:


> Rogers Centre was such a ridculous change of name. Should have went with something like Rogers SkyDome.


Then people would have just continued to call it SkyDome, which while nice for nostalgia, defeats the purpose of naming rights.


----------



## Patrick (Sep 11, 2002)

Westfalenstadion, Müngersdorfer Stadion, Waldstadion, Neckarstadion, etc., etc.

Price: Priceless.


----------



## JimB (Apr 7, 2005)

Patrick said:


> Westfalenstadion, Müngersdorfer Stadion, Waldstadion, Neckarstadion, etc., etc.
> 
> Price: Priceless.


Unfortunately not.

Especially when a club has to fund the construction of a new stadium. Without naming rights, many (if not most) new stadium builds wouldn't be affordable. My club, Spurs, certainly couldn't begin to contemplate building a long overdue and desperately needed new stadium if it wasn't for the fact that they expect to sign a £200 million (approx) combined naming rights and shirt sponsoship deal.

We'd all love the game to be free from garish marketing. But, for all but a minority of clubs, it simply isn't realistic to ignore the money on offer from companies willing to pour sponsorship money into football.

Pandora's Box was opened long ago when rich men started trying to buy success for their clubs.

It's too late to go back.


----------



## Blue Lou (Aug 4, 2007)

Where did you find that £200million figure?


----------



## isaidso (Mar 21, 2007)

ryebreadraz said:


> Then people would have just continued to call it SkyDome, which while nice for nostalgia, defeats the purpose of naming rights.


It does defeat the purpose, but I'm all in favour of people doing as they see fit rather than some arrogant company dictating to them how things will be. Rogers is a very arrogant company with little respect for Canadian culture. I'll never call it R*gers Centre.


----------



## koolio (Jan 5, 2008)

ryebreadraz said:


> Then people would have just continued to call it SkyDome, which while nice for nostalgia, defeats the purpose of naming rights.


As it is right now, I rarely hear anyone call it Rogers Centre (aside from those who are legally obligated to). Skydome just rolls off the tongue for everyone. In addition, a lot of people make a point out of calling it 
Skydome ... plus the fact that in general, "centre" usually refers to indoor arenas here ... not 50,000+ capacity stadiums.


----------

