R3 Passenger wrote:... I would not be opposed to the City Hall/15th Street Station being permanently renamed "Comcast Central Station" if Comcast were to pony up some dough for remodeling.
The more I think about the issue, the less I'm in favor of selling naming rights.
First, stations' names generally have a strong relation to their locations. That's a big help in determining where you are, especially for the vast majority of stations that aren't line endpoints. Of course there are plenty of Central Stations and Union Stations but they're almost invariably termini of some sort.
Second, the likelihood that a station could permanently retain a specific corporate entity's name is very low. Companies merge and divest like bubbles in a 70's lava lamp - the last firm I worked for had four different names in 15 years. Each time, a corporate station would gain a new name requiring new maps, new signs, and an adjustment period for riders. Maybe it's not hugely expensive but it's still disruptive.
Third (and yeah, this is a purely personal grumble) the practice has the flavor of renamings that occur in unstable countries after a revolution or invasion. The new guys use what I call the "male dog" approach, obliterating what was there before no matter how meaningful it is. Nizhny Novgorod becomes Gorky, Saigon becomes Ho Chi Minh City, Chemnitz becomes Karl-Marx-Stadt, the Great Buddhas are dynamited, and on and on. Granted "Comcast Station" isn't anywhere near the same level but it still represents a takeover by outside interests.
That said, I
would be in favor of the way Verizon proposes getting its name before the public. Fixing the place up and plastering its walls with Verizon equipment, ads, etc. benefits the riders and the company without wiping out the station's core identification.
Requiem for it's/its, your/you're, than/then, less/fewer. They were once such nice words with such different meanings...
