Whose Name Is It Anyway?
This is admittedly petty, but one problem with the constant mergers in the telecommunications industry in the post-1996 environment is that it's introduced a dangerous level of instability into the world of arena naming. Here in Washington, we've had the MCI Center for a while, but Verizon bought the company sometime last year and today it was officially redubbed the Verizon Center in honor of our new overlords. Confusingly, Verizon Wireless is not the wireless division of Verizon, but rather a separate firm that Verizon co-owns with Vodafone, some kind of English company.
Even more ridiculously, also last year SBC bought venerable long-distance giant AT&T which, by that time, had become a smaller firm. Smaller, but more famous, so SBC renamed itself AT&T forcing the good people of San Antonio to redub the SBC Center the AT&T Center even though it was their local corporate giant that had done the acquiring. Obviously, the nightmare scenario is that at some point AT&T will buy Verizon, provoking an arena-naming crisis. Hopefully, federal anti-trust regulators will step in at that point.
Alternatively, if you want a serious take on the regulatory issues in play here Reed Hundt is going to need to fill you in. The merging companies allege that this will speed the much-rumored introduction of video services from phone companies, thus providing the egregious Comcast with some much-needed competition, though it's not clear to my why merging would actually do that.
I just hope to have an all AA finals someday with the Heat and the Mavs.
March 6, 2006 6:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
Vodafone is the largest wireless phone company in the world. Is "some kind of English company' supposed to be ironic or are you truly clueless about the entire world outside the US? (Take a look at a Man U football jersey sometime.)
You're clearly clueless about the world inside the US, because there is no "wireless division of Verizon" other than the joint venture with Vodafone. Vodafone owns 45%, and Verizon runs it.
March 6, 2006 8:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
The baseball loving denizens of San Francisco have been abused perhaps the most by arena naming. Their new, lovely ballpark was originally named Pacific Bell or PacBell park. While corporate it was an apt title considering the park basically sits on well, you know, the Pacific. Then PacBell was sold to SBC, and the somewhat apt named was dropped in favor of the foreign SBC Park. No news on whether AT&T Ballpark is in the mix. They should just call it Barry Bonds Hits Homeruns Here and be done with the problem.
March 6, 2006 8:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Confusingly, Verizon Wireless is not the wireless division of Verizon, but rather a separate firm that Verizon co-owns with Vodafone, some kind of English company.
Huh? Verizon Wireless IS the wireless segment of Verizon Communications. As noted above, Verizon Communications doesn't own 100% of the equity of Verizon Wireless, but Verizon Communications does own a majority interest. Here's how Verizon Communications described Verizon Wireless in its most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed with the SEC:
So I don't see how Verizon Wireless is not Verizon Communications' wireless segment...
March 6, 2006 8:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
I suppose it's a measure of what an old fart I am that I am still not entirely desensitized to the humiliating, degrading, obsequiousness of cities allowing publically funded projects to be named after private corporations for a few paltry bucks. When are we going to see the WorldCom Washington Monument or the Verizon Lincoln Memorial, I wonder?
March 6, 2006 12:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, Squeeky Rat. Stroll on over to the Museum of Natural History and lookat the bugs in the Orkin Insect Zoo. Then cross the Mall to the Air & Space Museum and take in a movie at the Lockheed Martin IMAX® Theater.
March 6, 2006 1:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, but my guess is that Orkin and Lockheed Martin actually put up some money to fund these installations. They didn't just bid for the right to stick their names on them.
March 10, 2006 7:45 AM | Reply | Permalink