The BC Place Stadium naming rights debacle has dominated headlines in B.C. over the past ten days, and Mike Smyth’s excellent piece in the Sunday Province will probably extend that trend.

Smyth got a hold of the government’s market research regarding the deal, and it seemed favourable to renaming.

From his column:

Synovate sat down with two focus groups – one group of women, one men – and measured their reactions to the re-naming proposal, as well as the entire B.C. Place renovation project.

The result is a fascinating glimpse into how critical business decisions are made.

Researchers concluded there was public concern about the half-billion-dollar price of the project, and encouraged PavCo to stress the re-naming deal as a way to recover costs.

“The more THEY pay, the less WE pay,” was the key message.

The researchers tested several potential corporate naming sponsors for the renovated stadium, including Telus, VanCity, Blackberry, Nike, Best Buy, Granville Island Brewery, Molson, Lululemon and ICBC.

Telus came out on top with focus-group participants because it was local, large, financially stable (“able to shoulder at least $10 million per year”), had a “happy, fun” marketing image and is active in charity and community events.

Those positives outweighed negative images of Telus that included poor customer service, outsourcing jobs to India, a “plain, weird” name that didn’t generate “passion”, and a perception giant telecommunications companies are becoming too powerful.

“Bottom line: Telus meets and exceeds all criteria,” the researchers concluded.

That one line—“The more THEY pay, the less WE pay,” sums up our feelings pretty well. It shows the pragmatism and intelligence of B.C. taxpayers, who know full well how much BC Place cost to refurbish in the midst of a global economic downturn.

Smyth posted the full document here, and there are other interesting points:

• “There is clear permission for PavCo to sell the naming rights.”
• “There is a need for a clear link from the revenue generated from naming to the $458 million price tag.”
• “There are also some concerns that projects such as this will not be appropriately cost contained.”

Sounds to me like the public is pretty darned smart—take the $35 million from Telus and apply it to the overall cost of the project. Government’s reluctance to do so continues to baffle pundits, journalists, the CTF and the public.