Now more and more news is coming out.
The Daily News seems to be on top of their game today. Here's an article from Greg B. Smith and Larry McShane reporting that the Mets are denying Citigroup is going to break the deal.
Citigroup executives called to reiterate their commitment to the deal after a report in the Wall Street Journal that the package was in jeopardy, said David Howard, Mets executive vice president for operations.I have to agree with Howard here. I know that Citigroup is being bailed out, to the tune of a ridiculous amount of money ($45 billion), but they've promised none of the money going to the Mets is coming from the Troubled Asset Relief Program.
With April's opening day drawing near, Citigroup was ripped by two members of Congress last week for taking billions in bailout money while spending millions to put their name on a baseball stadium.
But Howard said there were dozens of other federal bailout fund recipients involved in naming rights deals and football bowl games sponsorships.
"Why is this deal being singled out?" he asked. "There is an element of unfairness in this situation."
From CNN:
Citigroup told CNN in a statement though that it has a "legally binding agreement" with the Mets, and that it is "using no TARP capital for Citi Field, or for marketing purposes."Still, where was the uproar when Citigroup sponosred this years Rose Bowl? What about commercials? Billboards? Taxi cabs? You still see Citi's name plastered everywhere. As I've said before, think of "Citi Field" as one giant commercial that's not going anywhere.
I know it's tough to stomach, even for me, but it's just a conglomeration of billboards and ugly patches that Citi has to dish to the Mets.
Oh, and by the way, Adam Rubin notes that even though many people have been claiming it's a $400 million deal for the naming rights, he's heard that it's actually more like $500 million.