CITI to possibly pull Mets stadium financing

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3881057

Some of the story:

I'm curious as to see what actually happens here.

 

Good.

 

One way or the other, we all know who really are going to pay for it. The taxpayers.

 

They should.

And all the companies which spent $3 mil on a SB ad after laying off tons of people need to fire their CEOs.

 

If the government is handing them a boatload of bailout money, they certainly should noit be spending $20mil a year on the naming rights of a stadium. But how much of that contract can they wiggle out from? There has to be some kind of buyout clause in there, but how much would it cost them?

My other question is these businesses, whether they ar banks or car manufacturers still have to advertise to get their product and name out there. Their are extremes of frivolusness like the stadium deal, but how much would be considered too much and should the government be poking around and trying to say OK, this is acceptable, this isn't?

 

You have to do some kind of advertising and marketing... a company would be foolish not to. But there has to be a little more sense to it than naming rights...

 

From the story: The Mets deal has been attacked as an example of misplaced spending by financial institutions that needed bailout funds. A Citigroup spokesman in New York told Reuters on Monday that "no TARP [troubled Asset Relief Program] capital will be used for Citi Field or for marketing purposes."

Also, if these companies come asking the government to bail them out, they lose their autonomy. You don't like it? Fine, but you're not getting our money.

 

So FUCKING what?

That money could be used to give people back their goddamned jobs.

As if they are being skilled parsing language. Whose SportsJournalists.com tagline is that Carlin quote about language?

 

BTW, Citi says it is keeping its Mets agreement.

It's like the prick who bought the Dolphins... Stephen M. Ross.... he has his hand out for government money.

 

For the sake of discussion, who gets to decide how these companies spend their bailout money? The government? The government is hardly a harbinger of fiscal responsibility.

These bailouts are a lose-lose and we're already seeing it. In theory they should work, but a zebra doesn't change its stripes and a piss-poor company doesn't automatically become a good one.

 

This will be fun to watch. ;D