Mid-day reading

citifield.jpgHere is a story I wrote on the Mets and Citigroup renewing their vows in a relationship that has developed quite the negative perception, based on world events.

Here is a short story quoting Jeff Wilpon on the Mets' offseason plans.

I'll have one more story coming, detailing how Citi Field is looking. Wilpon led a small group of media on a tour of the ballpark today.

I'll say this: For those of you who can afford the tickets, I think you'll really enjoy the place.

By the way, it's all but official that the Mets will host the 2013 All-Star Game. For now, Major League Baseball has announced only the next two years - St. Louis in 2009 and Anaheim in 2010. But it'll be Arizona in 2011, Kansas City in 2012 and then the Mets.


Comments (14)

I think the gov't regulaltors who now own a piece of CitiGroup should step in and demand this contract be declared null and void. It's one thing to advertise on radio, TV and print media at reasonable costs, probably more than $20 million a year to amrket yourself to the public. It's another thing to waste $400 million in "marketing" on naming rights to a stadium that most people will never call by name and will only be used to a large degree 81 days a year. The only place you will hear the word CitiField 365 days a year is the limited exposure it gets on SNY. The rest of the television and radio media will beat it to death as warranted, but not enough to justify such a stupid cost. This deal was made by a spendthrift CEO who should be fired for his incomptence in running the bank into the ground with foolish investments in hedge funds, mortgages and buying up other businesses.

Ken, why was only one All-Star Game played at Shea? I had heard during the 1990s that the ownership had no desire to play host.

Sandy, I won't defend the 1996 decision to pay $20M per year for the naming rights but a contract is still a contract. The contracts that Citi signs once bailout funds have been received will receive far greater scrutiny.

The deal the Mets made with Citigroup for the naming rights for their new stadium was done 2 years ago. Of course little did we knew 2 years later the economy is a total mess and Citigroup had to be bailout by the US government. Sooner or later the Mets have to pull the plug on their deal with Citigroup.
Reliever Doug Brocail re-signed with the Astros on a 1-year contract. So cross another name off the list relievers that are in the free agent market.
Ken Rosenthal is reporting that the Braves are in serious discussions with the White Sox for righthanded starter Javier Vazquez. So it seems the Braves have move on from Jake Peavy and are now interested in trading for Vazquez.
Ken, will the Yanks have a tour of the new Yankee Stadium for the media anytime soon?

It's perfect - Citi, which is almost bankrupt, is associating its
name with the Mets, who have folded twice in two years.
If Newsday buys the Mets, we can name the new park
"Comment Submission Error" Field

I find this whole argument regarding Citi Field to be almost boring in a way. The bank is still in business and is entitled to advertise any way it wants.

Many airlines went bankrupt and survived. Time will tell if Citigroup will survive. They might or might not. If they survive, fine. If they don't, that will be the end of it anyway.

It's a silly discussion, ready made for politicians to try to score points.

Nobody said anything about the agreement when it was signed so what's the big deal now.

Good call, Bob! Damn good call!

Ken, Rich Lederer of BaseballAnalysts.com believes that Darren Oliver is likely to accept arbitration and remain with the Halos. How odd that, by being a more effective pitcher, and thus obtaining "A" free agent status, Oliver may have been robbed of earning a lucrative, multi-year contract.

Dennis actually in 2006, Citibank probably already knew it was in deep doo-doo since this mortgage problem came to light first in May, 2007. As far as CitiGroup still being in business, they are in business at the expense of the American public and they do not have any right to make business decisions that can adversely affect the tax-paying public. Which is why every business decision they now make should be looked at by federal regulators and approved by them before they are done. They almost bought Wachovia bank a few months ago another bankrupt bank. What money did they have to pull that deal off?? Every business decision this company makes should be approved by an outside monitoring force until CitiGroup is capable of paying off their debt to the feds, which may be never. Look at the car companies, do you think they will have carte-blanche to do what they please once they get their bailout? They can't even get it now until they agree to do business in a certain way.

Jeff Wilpon is a MAJOR embarassment to Met fans.

First he's quoted as saying this:

“If it were me,” said Jeff Wilpon, the team’s chief operating officer, who wants Shea to be gone as soon as possible. “I’d just go in and bring them down.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/sports/baseball/24mets.html

Then this:

“The company is still an ongoing company and a vital company that is doing business around the globe,” Mets chief operating officer Jeff Wilpon said Tuesday. “The taxpayers are backstopping what’s going on in the global economy. It’s not really Citi’s fault that they’re in this problem. There are a lot of other banks in the same situation—with naming-rights deals, also.”

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AgG5UAEzN3D9aUNd.hMSTngRvLYF?slug=ap-mets-citigroup&prov=ap&type=lgns

He "can't wait" until the place I GREW UP IN is GONE?

He thinks the collapse of Citi is "NOT REALLY THEIR FAULT"

It's staggering that he's involved in making baseball decisions...decisions that will actually affect my enjoyment of my favorite thing in the world besides my family. Geez.

Ken - Can you call this idiot on the carpet...in print...please!


JoeNunz - and he's doing all this with the assistance of taxpayer money!!
Jeff S - it qualifies as a big deal because the Mets could face additional agita if the feds close down Citi or decide to pursue legal sanctions against the bank for its obvious failure to monitor its risk situation. No one wanted to sign Barry Bonds because of pending legal matters, so the Mets have to be careful with whom they chose to associate. Any indictments of Citi officials for RICO or fraud don't exactly help your advertising, espceially when the company involved is laying off close to 50,000 New Yorkers,

JE, Joel Sherman of the Post and I were actually discussing Oliver's situation today at Citi Field. You nailed his situation perfectly. He has little choice but to accept the Angels' arbitration offer.

Dennis, the Yankees gave the media a tour of the new Yankee Stadium a few weeks ago.

JoeNunz, you're right, Jeff Wilpon has to be more mindful of his words. That said, be fortunate you're not a Yankees fan and getting embarrassed regularly by Hank Steinbrenner and Randy Levine.

Not that this is sports, but it shouldn't surprise anyone that Donald Trump is about to declare bankruptcy again. Maybe even as soon as tomorrow. I think this will be #4 for him.
Ken, Yankee fans wouldn't be embarrassed by Hank Steinbrenner if everyone treated him as the blowhard he is and not pay attention to anything he says, since what he says means zilch. I notice he hasn't been quoted once since Hal got the job.

Ken- I was afraid that you'd say that...at least Jeff isn't Hank. I had hoped we could set the bar a little higher! :)

Ken, now that it appears the Braves will acquired Javier Vazquez
from the White Sox, how much leverage does Kevin Towers
and the Padres lose when it comes to trading Jake Peavy? The
Braves were considering one of the teams that Peavy would waive
his no-trade cause to get traded. But now that it looks like the
Braves will get Vazquez, are the Braves still inteested in Peavy and
where do the Padres stand right now in their effect to traded Peavy.

"I find this whole argument regarding Citi Field to be almost boring in a way. The bank is still in business and is entitled to advertise any way it wants.
Many airlines went bankrupt and survived. Time will tell if Citigroup will survive. They might or might not. If they survive, fine. If they don't, that will be the end of it anyway.
It's a silly discussion, ready made for politicians to try to score points.
Nobody said anything about the agreement when it was signed so what's the big deal now.
I find this whole argument regarding Citi Field to be almost boring in a way. The bank is still in business and is entitled to advertise any way it wants.
Many airlines went bankrupt and survived. Time will tell if Citigroup will survive. They might or might not. If they survive, fine. If they don't, that will be the end of it anyway.
It's a silly discussion, ready made for politicians to try to score points.
Nobody said anything about the agreement when it was signed so what's the big deal now."

First of all, Citi didn't declare bankruptcy. They received a huge bailout with taxpayer funds. They shouldn't be spending $400 million on putting their name over a ballpark. That's just commonsense. The Mets should encourage Citi to cancel the deal. No one said anything 2+ years ago because the company wasn't going under and didn't have its hand out. Citi is in real trouble. The next disaster is reportedly going to involve credit card defaults when the massive layoffs start in January. Citi is a major player in the credit card market. They will need another huge bailout. This is well known. The Mets are in for bad PR for years to come with the Citi name over their stadium.

Post a comment


Please enter the security code you see here

Search Ken Davidoff's MLB Insider

Recent Posts

Popular Topics

(view all)

Categories

Feed Subscription

If you use an RSS reader, you can subscribe to this blog's feed [What is this?]

Subscribe to feed RSS feed   |   Subscribe to feed ATOM feed

Baseball Video

Archives