The Denver Broncos will begin playing their football in a new stadium (maybe they already have). The new stadium is called Invesco Field at Mile Hig. Invesco paid $60 million for the naming rights. I know many people bemoan the corporate naming of stadiums, personally I find it a bit irritating, but don’t mind so much. but the truth is that that is the way fo the world these days and $60 million can do a lot of things. I am not sure who gets the money, the Broncos or the city or someone else.
THe main point is, however, not to debate coprorate naming of stadiums. It seems the Denver Post has made an editorial decision to NOT refer to the stadium by it’s name. They will call it Mile High Stadium. An individual can call it what they like, but it seems to me that a paper has a responsibility to the facts and objectivity…even in the sports section. However, this is nothing more than advocacy on their part. They should get off their high horse (except in editorials) and call it by what the name of the stadium is and not what they think it should be.
I’ve always viewed the “naming rights” thing as nothing more than another form of advertising. Think of it as a company turning the entire facility into a giant billboard. The company does this in order to achieve name recognition…the more people that are exposed to the name through the media, the more name recognition is achieved. In effect, the media then becomes a surrogate advertiser for the company every time the sponsor’s name of the stadium is mentioned. I don’t see why a media outlet that didn’t receive a dime in advertising revenue from the company should call a sports facility by that company’s name, especially if the new name has replaced an older name.
Aren’t there some sports facilities that have changed their names more than once within the last few years? I seem to recall that the stadium in Oakland has had more than a few monikers in recent times.
Besides, some companies have become aware that their names help lend to some strange nicknames for the sporting facilities:
MCI Center: “Phone Booth”
Pepsi Center: “Pop Stand”
Bank One Ballpark: “the BOB”
Edison Field: “the Lightbulb”
FleetCenter: The first time I heard this name, I thought Fleet referred to the laxative brand called “Fleet”, and wondered why in the hell would any team permit its arena to be named after something like that. Then I later found out that it’s really a bank. In any case, if it really was named after the laxative product, the nicknames that people would have come up with could have been vile.
Ok, that’s all fine and good. But then shouldn’t they be consistent and do it for all corporate sponsored venues and events. College Bowl games? Golf tournaments? Other stadiums? The Ronald McDonald House?
You would think that the success of the team that plays in a facility would have some positive effect for the corporate sponsor.
The Rams won Super Bowl XXXIV. The Ravens won Super Bowl XXXV. Both teams played in stadiums named for corporations that have since filed for bankruptcy.
The Ronald McDonald House is a charitable venture, not a sportinng event or commerical enterprise.
As to the rest of your question, I think the media should be consistent as well. I would rather see ESPN refer to it as the Orange Bowl instead of the “Federal Express Orange Bowl.”
Is this the place that that broadcasters were yelled at for calling it The Diaphragm? [sub]Due to it’s striking resemblance of that type of contraceptive device.[/sub]
Well, perhaps INVESCO would have gotten a better treatment had they not threatened to sue the Denver Post for publishing a column in which a man claiming to be “senior management” is quoted as saying that many INVESCO employees call it “diaphram stadium.”
INVESCO said the paper was essentially slandering all 800 some-odd employees by publishing the piece.
They announced they were dropping the suit a few days later (I assume after their lawyers told management “I think you’re F****** stupid”).
Good thing the columnist kept a business card and had a witness to the conversation, huh?
(Note to financial news editors and reporters: be careful when covering the neofascists at INVESCO)
[devilsadvocate]If I were Invesco, and the Denver Post refused to call the stadium by its proper name, I would assure the Denver Post that they would never see a single dollar in advertising revenue from Invesco.
I wonder how much Invesco has spent on advertising in the Post over the last few years?[/devilsadvocate]
I dislike the trend of ‘naming rights’, but I also dislike it when a friend or aquaintence suddenly wants to be called something else. But who the heck cares what I like. People can call themselves whatever they like. Whether I approve or not, calling someone(or thing) by a name other than the one they specified seems rude and jerkish.
I mean, you think the Post would like it if Invesco started to refer to the paper publicly as ‘that stinking rag’?
That is personal rule for me. I draw the line at people who’s new names are unpronouncable or are symbols instead of words.(that’s right Prince, I’m talking 'bout you!)
I would point out that the stadium the Baltimore Orioles play in is officially named “Oriole Park at Camden Yards,” but I’ve never heard it referred to as Oriole Park since they opened the joint. And that’s not even a corporate name. So it’s not unique to the Denver post to not use the official name.
The Denver Post is not required to call Mile High Stadium Invesco anything just because Invesco threw a bunch of money at the owners of the stadium. They are certainly not required to do it in order to make Invesco happy, unless Invesco happens to have a profitable working relationship with the Denver Post, i.e. advertising. The newspaper is there to report the news, not be a surrogate advertiser for Invesco. Invesco is pissed because they aren’t getting their ‘money’s worth’ out of this advertising scheme, tough, if you don’t pay the newspaper, don’t expect them to advertise for you.
Maybe Invesco should buy some ad space and ask the editor to change this decision.
Well I would like to point out the name is VERY contraversial in Denver. It was widely opposed. I’ve seen numbers run from 30%-60% (depending on who ran the poll) of the residents against the stadium being named anything but Mile High. When the stadium was approved a Naming Board was created which had basically two roles, reduce costs and take into consideration local sentiment. In fact there were a couple of buyers interested in keeping the name Mile High. They of course were not willing to pay nearly as much. So many people feel that naming board failed in their job and that the combo name Invesco Field at Mile High was a cop out. No one is going to use the full name. In fact although all the local media was very diligent at calling it IFaMH for a while, almost all of them now refer to it as just Invesco Field.
Now add into this mix Woody Page, a caustic kind of sports columnist. Woody (who is the same guy who coined “The Can” as a nickname for the Pepsi Center), like everyone else, wrote several columns on the nameing contravesy. In one of these columns he mentioned that many people at Invesco opposed buying the rights. The feeling was that it would be a PR misstep. Woody also mentioned the nickname of at least one Invesco VP for the stadium. Now if Invesco would have kept its mouth shut at this point, it would have gone the same way as the rest of Woody’s columns. In a couple of weeks it would have been forgotten. Instead they Invesco threatened to sue, made sure everyone in the state heard about it (repetitively), and started quite a few conversations on exactly what the stadium did resemble. I know at least one guy who now calls it the French Tickler.
To answer pldennison according to other local media outlets, Invesco has never spent a dime advertising in the Post. So the Post loses no revenue, gets free advertising, and gains the loyalty of the above mentioned 30%-60% who opposed the naming scheme in the first place. In addition this has given new life to those who oppose the name. Now Mayor Webb has renamed all the roads around the stadium to Mile High Stadium Drive. In the end all Invesco may have ended up with is the name on the building. It may very easily end up like Camden Yards.
In my opinion Invesco has made a series of mistakes and has probably thrown away $60 million. I don’t doubt that every time Dennis Miller is in the place, he will humiliate everyone involved. In the end I think the people of Denver are going to accept the money and call it Mile High. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see several other outlets eventually follow the Post’s Lead.
I was upset when they decided to sell the naming rights, too (Well, not that upset. I didn’t lose sleep or anything). And I don’t call it “Invesco Field at Mile High” in my casual conversation. I call it “Mile High”. But honestly, much as I am tickled that The Denver Post is taking this stand, I don’t think it’s a Good Thing.
The newspaper has a responsibility to get things right. As much as people would like to think the name is Mile High Stadium, it ain’t. And the Post needs to be, above all, accurate. If the Wood wants to call it something in his column, that’s fine. But for a news story, they should call it the correct name.
[hijack] Bartman, we expect to see you at the next Denver DopeFest.
[/hijack]
Really? From now on, I wish to be called “MrNeutron, who is the smartest person in the world, and certainly much much better looking than spooje, who resembles a deformed sea-slug”.
Now, will you respect my wishes and call me that, whether you “approve or not”? Or will you say “No, that name is silly, and I refuse to use it”, which is what the Denver Post is saying?
