In the last few decades, new stadium construction has been frequent in the world of professional sports. As is common nowadays in the construction of these types of buildings, they often choose to sell its naming rights.
From a marketing standpoint, I can understand why one organization would want to sell the naming rights (additional cash flow) and another buy them (marketing awareness). My personal reaction is two fold: First, I’m a little more skeptical of the long-term benefit to the selling organization. You’re gaining dollars, but losing the opportunity to create a true, memorable community icon. And second, the slow passing of unique, conceptual stadium names is disappointing.
Here are two examples: Before it was demolished, Three Rivers Stadium (named because it was built where the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers join to form the Ohio River) was home to the NFL’s Pittsburgh Steelers. It was replaced in 2001 by Heinz Field. And Veterans Stadium (so named to honor veterans of all wars), previous home of the Philadelphia Eagles, was demolished and replaced by Lincoln Financial Field.
The names Heinz Field and Lincoln Financial Field say nothing about their respective cities. They could be anywhere. Three Rivers Stadium reflects the unique geography of the Pittsburgh area, and thus has more personality. Veterans Stadium? For one of the patriotic centers of our nation, the fit is perfect.
Does the name really matter? From a practical standpoint, maybe not. After all, it certainly doesn’t physically affect the venue’s ability to provide a suitably enjoyable experience for eventgoers. The name “Heinz Field” isn’t going to keep people from doing what they really want, which is to go see the Steelers play football.
If Heinz Field remained Heinz Field forever, I would probably care less. But due to the temporary nature of contracts, it’s probable that eventually the Steelers will end up selling the naming rights again. Now, the Steelers have lost the iconic value that has been built up in the name “Heinz Field.” In addition, they have to change all of their brochures, materials, Web site references, everything that says “Heinz Field” to Bud Light Field or Burger King Field or (as famously spoofed in the movie Baseketball) Tampax Stadium.
If you don’t believe the possibility of a stadium with a naming rights deal reaching absurd proportions, then consider the case of Sun Life Stadium, home to the Miami Dolphins. Originally constructed as Joe Robbie Stadium in 1986 (named after the entrepreneur who led the financing campaign to get it built), the rights to naming the stadium were sold to Fruit of the Loom in 1996, who then named the stadium after its Pro Player athletic wear division.
In 2005, that deal ended, and the team reverted the name to the simple Dolphins Stadium. In 2007, it was subsequently shortened to Dolphin Stadium. In 2009, a sponsorship deal was once again struck, this time to promote to Jimmy Buffet’s new LandShark Lager. That deal lasted just year, however, and in 2010, the beginning of a new five-year deal will lead to the stadium being named after Sun Life Financial.
If you’re counting, that’s six name changes in 23 years. No marketing consultant in their right mind would recommend that. Maybe it’s different in the world of professional sports, where there’s enough television exposure on a weekly basis that people discover quickly that names have been changed.
Reality is that people adjust to name changes and accept it, whether they like it or not. But does “Heinz Field” carry the iconic resonance of, say, Arrowhead Stadium or Soldier Field, which instantly make you think of Kansas City and Chicago, respectively? I say no. And that’s why, ultimately, for the image and awareness of the surrounding community, the dollars earned by the seller in a naming rights deal may not be worth quite as much as the contract states.