Kenmore Square North (WHOOP) | 533-541 Commonwealth Ave | Fenway

Change the triangle LEDs to pink and the letters to "LETGO!"
 
Money said:
For what it's worth, Citgo may not be Venezuelan owned in the near future. Apparently companies that lost billions of dollars via Venezuela's expropriation of assets could seize US-based Citgo refineries as compensation (I read this in Forbes...I'll try and find the article). Not sure the details of how this plays out...I think a Russian producer holds a lein against the company (like a 49.9% stake in the company), so who knows what will happen. Citgo retail locations are independently owned and operated, so not much would likely change on that end, since there is still a lot of brand equity in the Citgo name.
Click to expand...

I am sure going from being owned by a violent Venezuelan dictatorship to being owned by Vladimir Putin will really.improve Citgo's brand. What's the backup plan after that? Get bought out by a Middle Eastern dictatorship that beheads gay people for sport?

Wynn had to rebrand because of #metoo... I guess if you get murdered you don't get a hashtag
 
Folks,

If we rip out every bit of history that exists in the world because there is someone connected to it that way a flaming bastard, we would have zero history. The Citgo symbol has move WAY beyond an advertisement. It has transmuted into an icon, mostly of the Red Sox and Fenway Park, but of a neighborhood.

I think it would be a shame for that sign to come down because it is a unique, authentic, and meaningful symbol that has moved beyond its original intention... but I also dont think the world would end. I feel the same way about Fenway Park itself. I will cry salty tears when it finally gets replaced (it will) ... but I will understand why.

cca
 
CCA gets it, but I'd also be okay with Cadet Carl's idea. As for Yawkey Way, I can now confirm that the sign is gone, and it's Jersey St. all the way through, just as it once was.
 
tangent said:
I am sure going from being owned by a violent Venezuelan dictatorship to being owned by Vladimir Putin will really.improve Citgo's brand. What's the backup plan after that? Get bought out by a Middle Eastern dictatorship that beheads gay people for sport?

Wynn had to rebrand because of #metoo... I guess if you get murdered you don't get a hashtag
Click to expand...

Putin is pulling the strings at the White House and pretty much the entire Republican party and you're worried about the symbolism behind the Citgo sign? Look, I get what you're saying but maybe this isn't the highest priority right now in terms of geopolitical issues...
 
cca said:
I feel the same way about Fenway Park itself. I will cry salty tears when it finally gets replaced (it will) ... but I will understand why.

cca
Click to expand...

Fenway is now a lot closer to the average on MLB seating capacity than 25 years ago. The trend with new parks has been like, 40~42,000 seats. ....Fenway could increase seating by 3~5,000 and they'd be home. i think replacing Fenway would be a huge mistake. Hopefully, the public outcry would stop it from happening.
 
Why not relocate the sign to be within Fenway Park somewhere?
 
I think I would be fine with the Citgo sign if we had some other landmark that was more meaningful, more well known and the sign was just some Red Sox fan thing like the Green Monster.

I hate that it has become THE Boston landmark/icon.
 
Beton Brut & CCA nail it again.

Also - BB - so glad you linked to Kevin Lynch's photos of Boston — even as I read that I knew it would be one of the Lynch nocturnal neon photos. For those who want to go down a real Boston rabbithole, those MIT photos on Flickr are amazing and you can go further via the Kevin Lynch site on MIT's page.

Stata - I definitely don't think of it as THE Boston icon. Most people I show around the city for the first time aren't familiar with it. Maybe that's related to the fact that most of them aren't bigtime sports fans. But I can't recall anyone ever bringing up the Citgo sign either on a tour or when I tell someone where I'm from.

And re: ads more generally, many things that are symbols have some commercial affiliate, or originally did. There used to be a website that made logos for each of Boston's neighborhoods - (does anyone remember the link? I can't find it anymore) - and the South End logo was a highly stylized image of the HITE TV sign... which is apparently in storage now.
 
Rover said:
Putin is pulling the strings at the White House and pretty much the entire Republican party and you're worried about the symbolism behind the Citgo sign? Look, I get what you're saying but maybe this isn't the highest priority right now in terms of geopolitical issues...
Click to expand...

Luckily we don't have to worry about those highest priorities here in a thread dedicated to a project... a project being architecturally and financially hamstrung by insane political pressure to keep a sign inextricably linked to the murderous regime that still owns the Citgo brand and actually controls the company.

Maybe the brand can be rehabilitated, but if the city is really "spending" its ability to protect and preserve history on this then the Walsh administration/Local press really should step in to point out the idiocy of keeping the sign and get ahead of this for once.

Seems like everyone is still stuck on "OooOOOo cool big red triangle" that I can see from Fenway.

And the Citgo company is getting a huge subsidy on advertising costs via the City's insistence on keeping the sign the same no matter what. If the City is going to be subsidizing any company, the last company on Earth getting that subsidy should be Citgo.
 
tangent said:
Luckily we don't have to worry about those highest priorities here in a thread dedicated to a project... a project being architecturally and financially hamstrung by insane political pressure to keep a sign inextricably linked to the murderous regime that still owns the Citgo brand and actually controls the company.

Maybe the brand can be rehabilitated, but if the city is really "spending" its ability to protect and preserve history on this then the Walsh administration/Local press really should step in to point out the idiocy of keeping the sign and get ahead of this for once.

Seems like everyone is still stuck on "OooOOOo cool big red triangle" that I can see from Fenway.

And the Citgo company is getting a huge subsidy on advertising costs via the City's insistence on keeping the sign the same no matter what. If the City is going to be subsidizing any company, the last company on Earth getting that subsidy should be Citgo.
Click to expand...

Does Citgo have any gas stations anymore? Can't remember the last time I've seen one. If its a state owned entity drilling for crude oil I don't think Bostonians seeing the sign is doing a lot for Citgo's bottom line. As it is it shouldn't cost the city a dime to tell the developer to preserve it as part of their new construction. God knows NIMBY's impose a lot stupider demands on a regular basis in order to not tie up projects in court so I fail to see why all those pay-for-pay schemes are grudgingly accepted while this one is out of bounds.
 
Fun fact from Bloomberg today: North Dakota is Now Pumping as Much Crude as Venezuela. And Venezuelan production is expected to keep dropping for the foreseeable future.

Unless things in Venezuela turn around -- which is unlikely any time soon -- Citgo as we know it probably isn't long for this world.

I say replace "CITGO" with "FENWAY" in the same typeface and (like this) and keep everything else about the sign the same.
 
JumboBuc said:
Fun fact from Bloomberg today: North Dakota is Now Pumping as Much Crude as Venezuela. And Venezuelan production is expected to keep dropping for the foreseeable future.

Unless things in Venezuela turn around -- which is unlikely any time soon -- Citgo as we know it probably isn't long for this world.

I say replace "CITGO" with "FENWAY" in the same typeface and (like this) and keep everything else about the sign the same.
Click to expand...

As long as CITGO and any trademark owning successors are around, you cannot just go appropriating their trade dress. That is trademark infringement.
 
JeffDowntown said:
As long as CITGO and any trademark owning successors are around, you cannot just go appropriating their trade dress. That is trademark infringement.
Click to expand...

What if CITGO agreed? They don't even want this sign here anymore anyway, and, last I heard, very begrudgingly made some sort of maintenance payment in lieu of rent for the sign space. If they formally agreed that "FENWAY" [TRIANGLE] could be used by the city in exchange for not having to pay a cent anymore, could that scheme be tenable? What they get is "CITGO" remaining in the vernacular and on top-of-mind of people (since obviously people are still going to call it The Citgo Sign even after the lettering changes) without some competitor or other business threat using their trademark for adverse purposes...

Or, we could change the lettering to "FENWAY" and change the triangle to something else (a pair of red sox perhaps?)...based on discussions with CITGO to get to a point where they felt it was sufficiently distanced from their trademark. I mean, at some point it is distanced enough, right? (I remember the World Wildlife Federation taking legal action against the WWF (the fake wrestling people) for infringement...and, apparently, the resulting "WWE" was far enough from the mark that the Wildlife people didn't care anymore). I mean, at some point CITGO is not going to care...
 
bigpicture7 said:
What if CITGO agreed? They don't even want this sign here anymore anyway, and, last I heard, very begrudgingly made some sort of maintenance payment in lieu of rent for the sign space. If they formally agreed that "FENWAY" [TRIANGLE] could be used by the city in exchange for not having to pay a cent anymore, could that scheme be tenable? What they get is "CITGO" remaining in the vernacular and on top-of-mind of people (since obviously people are still going to call it The Citgo Sign even after the lettering changes) without some competitor or other business threat using their trademark for adverse purposes...

Or, we could change the lettering to "FENWAY" and change the triangle to something else (a pair of red sox perhaps?)...based on discussions with CITGO to get to a point where they felt it was sufficiently distanced from their trademark. I mean, at some point it is distanced enough, right? (I remember the World Wildlife Federation taking legal action against the WWF (the fake wrestling people) for infringement...and, apparently, the resulting "WWE" was far enough from the mark that the Wildlife people didn't care anymore). I mean, at some point CITGO is not going to care...
Click to expand...

If CITGO agrees (likely for $$), then of course it is not infringement. Companies, even defunct ones, often license their trade dress (good local example is Polaroid, who is defunct, yet their logo is licensed for all kinds of products).
 
JeffDowntown said:
If CITGO agrees (likely for $$), then of course it is not infringement. Companies, even defunct ones, often license their trade dress (good local example is Polaroid, who is defunct, yet their logo is licensed for all kinds of products).
Click to expand...

Any licensing rate is a product of the licensee's willingness to pay for a license and the licensor's willingness to accept payment, both informed by the alternative in which no licensing agreement is reached.

In this hypothetical situation, it would come down to:

Option 1) The Citgo sign is taken down.
Option 2) The Citgo sign is left up but with "CITGO" replaced with "FENWAY"

From Citgo's perspective Option 2 would likely be preferable to Option 1. This would leave Citgo with no bargaining power to demand payment for 2 over 1.

This is different from, for example, Polaroid, because there no-name electronics companies want to license the Polaroid name to give their products recognition and credibility to consumers. The licencors materially benefit from using the "Polaroid" name, and are accordingly willing to pay for it.

The City of Boston would not financially benefit from using the Citgo "Delta," and the alternative would not be appealing to Citgo. Citgo would have incentive to allow the triangle to stay up and no incentive to have the sign taking down.
 
bigpicture7 said:
(I remember the World Wildlife Federation taking legal action against the WWF (the fake wrestling people) for infringement...and, apparently, the resulting "WWE" was far enough from the mark that the Wildlife people didn't care anymore).
Click to expand...

Could folks get behind an animated version of this image?
430x550
 
Folks, back to 541 Commonwealth Avenue, "The Westgate", the western gateway to both Kenmore Square and the Commonwealth Avenue Mall, with the other bookend being the Public Garden:

The Design Committee of the Boston Civic Design Commission will meet tomorrow (Tuesday, September 25, 2018) with the following agenda:
@5:00pm City Hall Room #937A 144 Addison Street
@6:00pm City Hall Room #933A Kenmore Square (North) Development
All are welcome to attend. I would strongly encourage those of you interested in seeing 541 Commonwealth preserved within Related Beal's proposed development to attend and speak in favor of preservation; there will be an opportunity for you to comment. It's appreciated...and necessary!

Interestingly, professor Sara Wermiel has stated that 541 Commonwealth is one of the few surviving building in Boston which used the innovative Roebling fireproof floor construction system.
 
They don't need to save the building.

They need to preserve the facade.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top