Should Cities Sell Naming Rights to Transit Stations?

[rbt]

So no one objects to the Air Canada Centre? How about the CN Tower? Scotia Tower? RBC Centre? It's not like we have that much significant history attached to the names. Couldn't we name stations after the major employer at the stop?

CN Tower isn't a good example. I don't believe it has been owned by or had naming rights paid by CN for a large number of years. Would it be okay for it to be renamed to Coca-Cola tower for 10 years, then to Tide Tower for the 10 after that?

Office buildings are a touch different because they are typically the largest tenant. You can go to RBC Centre and find RBC staff who may (or may not) be able to help you.

I still call the Blue Jays home Skydome.

 

[Mapleson]

CN Tower isn't a renewable naming right, but it is a corporate brand that we use without considering it to be violating our civic pride. Naming a station after a major employer makes it harder for that employer to pull out of Canada. At the end of the day, it's just a name and people with call it want they want.

 

[junctionist]

So no one objects to the Air Canada Centre? How about the CN Tower? Scotia Tower? RBC Centre? It's not like we have that much significant history attached to the names. Couldn't we name stations after the major employer at the stop?

Those are all private buildings. The vast majority of subway station names have some history attached to them (some of them are quite significant) and we can always rename some of the more generic ones. Interestingly, Montreal has named some stations after civic and Quebecois leaders. Jean Drapeau, for instance, one of the greatest city-builders this country has ever known, debt legacy be damned.

 

[adma]

Remember that the CN Tower's still the CN Tower due to a little sleight-of-hand; once Canadian National withdrew sponsorship, it became "Canada's National Tower", or something like that.

Pretty lame substitute for Allan Fleming's spaghetti strand, that

 

[Catapult]

I think it is a great idea. We should also sell naming rights to our streets and parks. Heck why stop there - could we sell the naming rights to the City or even the country? I think the "The Dominion of Toronto-Dominion" sounds pretty good.

 

[west_end_kid]

I think this is a good example of where the confusion would start. When I refer to the O'Keefe Centre people under 30 have no idea what I'm talking about. You mean the Hummingbird? Now its SONY. I'll occasionally see ads for a play or event coming to a local venu and have no idea where it is because the name has changed. Toronto Centre for the Arts has changed its name 3 times since opening in 93.

Although I do not support naming rights, I would support sponsored station design and upkeep. Like if Coke was bought the rights to re-design Dundas station and replaced the current tiles and made the staton one big advertisement that they had to maintain... great!

What I don't ever want is someone asking for directions and hearing "Take this train to Vagasil and then transfer south and get off at I Can't Beleive Its Not Butter'.

 

[nfitz]

CN Tower isn't a renewable naming right, but it is a corporate brand that we use without considering it to be violating our civic pride.

If CN Tower were to be rebranded, how would it be any different than when the Post Office Tower was rebranded in London?

 

[kEiThZ]

If CN Tower were to be rebranded, how would it be any different than when the Post Office Tower was rebranded in London?

Or the Sears Tower in Chicago.

 

[W. K. Lis]

What next? Branding of street names?

The Queen Elizabeth Way as so named after Elizabeth Angela Marguerite Bowes-Lyon , the Queen Mother (consort to King George VI) in 1930's. The original name was Lower Middle Road.

Lot Street was renamed Queen Street, in Toronto, after Queen Victoria.

Maybe we should name our garbage dumps after retired politicians. The David Miller dump?

 

[golodhendil]

So no one objects to the Air Canada Centre? How about the CN Tower? Scotia Tower? RBC Centre? It's not like we have that much significant history attached to the names. Couldn't we name stations after the major employer at the stop?

Naming of sports arenas is a whole another issue that has received its fair share of criticisms.
CN Tower was built, with CN money and on CN land, when CN was a crown corporation. Now the abbreviation is back-constructed to stand for "Canada's National". Nothing about private corporate sponsorship in either case.
The others are privately-funded, privately-owned buildings designed from the outset to be the companies' offices. Obscenities/profanities aside, they can name themselves Baloney Central for all we care.
Naming stations after major employer/landmarks near them has been regarded as acceptable further up the thread, but that's not the case with Philly's new AT&T station.

 

[ladyscraper]

Naming of sports arenas is a whole another issue that has received its fair share of criticisms.

A lot of people hate this but as with everything with ads and marketing, there is nothing you can do to stop it. I look at advertising this way: if there is any possible way to make things even worse in the world, it WILL happen. Anything that people are joking about in this thread that sounds far-fetched will sadly come true eventually.

Look how terrible the world is already:

When you look at how bad things are right now, it's easy to see that it will only get worse. The day will come when we take the Coca-Cola Subway Line to watch the new years fireworks at "Taco Bell Square" (formally Nathan Phillips Square) and all you can do is sigh.

 

[cacruden]

Hey, whatever you can do to finance the transit system is fine with me.

 

[rbt]

Hey, whatever you can do to finance the transit system is fine with me.

Really? Current advertising (all of it) on the TTC reduces the fare by about a penny. Naming entire lines would be a fraction of that.

How much are you willing to give away for a fraction of a cent?

 

[SlickFranky]

Really? Current advertising (all of it) on the TTC reduces the fare by about a penny. Naming entire lines would be a fraction of that.

How much are you willing to give away for a fraction of a cent?

Is that acurate? Why are we even bothering with ads at all then? I'd gladly pay upwards of 5 cents/trip extra to ride an ad-free system.

 

[rbt]

Is that acurate? Why are we even bothering with ads at all then? I'd gladly pay upwards of 5 cents/trip extra to ride an ad-free system.

Looks like I was recalling the 2005 budget year when advertising revenue was about $12M.

In 2009, ad revenue was budgeted at $17M and total operations at $918M, or advertising revenue was to cover 1.8% of total operations budget.

If we assume we can get a 1.8% increase in the subsidy, then the token fare would need to go up by about 4.16 cents to cover advertising loss. If it was covered entirely by the farebox with no government subsidy, you get your nickle per trip.