Should the NY Mets not allow Citibank to have naming rights to their new ballpark?

Citibank is spending $400 million to have the new Mets stadium named after them. After taking bailout money from the federal government (hence, all of our pockets), should they be allowed to use that $400 million for something as trivial as a baseball stadium? Maybe they should call it "Taxpayer Park" instead.

Should the NY Mets not allow Citibank to have naming rights to their new ballpark?
I think the government should put a stop to it and make them call the field N.Y. Taxpayer Stadium. After all, they were the ones who really paid to have it built. Now they're also the ones who paid the money to Citibank so they can afford to name it, and paid the money so Citibank can buy the luxury boxes they would never allow the average taxpayer into. The whole thing stinks.
Reply:The Mets need the money as much as anyone else, so of course they should allow it.





As for Citi, the commitment to Mets is contracted, so they've already committed the money, but that $400 million is being spent over 20 years (vs. 20 mil / year). Their bailout, by contrast was dor 350 BILLION, which means that total cost of the deal is just over ONE TENTH OF ONE PERCENT of the bailout, and that's to be paid out in TWENTY years.


The per year cost come down to SIX ONE HUNDREDTHS OF ONE PERCENT. or "6/10000"





Realistically, given the minute impact in the face of the requested bailouts, ticky-tack items like executive compensation, corporate jets and stadium names are undeserving of ANY public ire. This is not the reason that banks failed, and the troubling thing is that people don't seem to want to care about why they did. They'd rather scorn the meaningless symbolic items.
Reply:The Mets would have to refund the money -- like that's gonna happen -- and in today's economy, it's not likely another sponsor would step up with such a generous deal.





Look, if you want to punish Citi for their dismal financial practices, cancel your credit cards with them and close out your checking accounts. It's not nearly the high-profile symbolism of taking their signs off a ballpark, but get enough people to do it and it'll hurt.
Reply:Why would it be up to the Mets to refuse all that money because CitiBank can't run their business right.





If the money doesn't come from a corporation, it's coming out of the fan's pocket.





Remember, baseball teams don't spend their own money.
Reply:If CitiGroup has the money to kickout for the naming rights, then I'm fine with it. Funny thing though, I went passed the stadium the other day by train and the stop is still called Willets Point "Shea Stadium". I wonder if that's going to be changed soon.
Reply:It doesn't really matter, Citibank isn't going to be able to afford to pay the $400 million over the next 20 years and will do whatever they can to get out of the contract.
Reply:I think it is okay, IF they are forced to call it Shittybank Park until they repay the bailout funds.
Reply:The Mets should do as they wish. However, the US government should not allow it.
Reply:No way should that be allowed unless they payback all the bailout money right now! The government needs to come down on some of these guys!