back to article London slaps down Salesforce's bid to rename Heron Tower

The City of London has slapped down Salesforce and banned it from changing the name of a prominent skyscraper. The cloud computing firm is based in the Heron Tower, near Liverpool Street, which it had wanted to rename the Salesforce Tower. But at a meeting today, politicians voted against the plan and instead decided to call …

Silver badge
WTF?

Ridiculous

What a ridiculous demand by Salesforce. Buid a skyscraper of your own, idiots.

19
1
Silver badge

Yes

Like RCA did in 1931

I think it was later GE and now Comcast

Or Crysler

I thought though for a moment it was the Heroin Tower,

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Yes

"I thought though for a moment it was the Heroin Tower,

<snort!>

4
0
Anonymous Coward

The naming rights of an edifice.........

are typically between the tenants and the building owner.

The government should have nothing to do with it unless they own the building.

In general, those naming rights would have been offered for sale before anyone proposed the name.

Therefore, the owner of the building must have offered them to Salesforce.

Why do politicians feel they have any right to insert themselves in a private contract?

1
16
Anonymous Coward

Re: The naming rights of an edifice.........

Which is why there was an article a month ago (at least) where the building owners rejected Salesforce's proposal, no idea why this has come up again..........

6
1

Re: The naming rights of an edifice.........

My understanding from the earlier article was that Salesforce demanded the name change.

1
0
WTF?

Re: The naming rights of an edifice.........

"Why do politicians feel they have any right to insert themselves in a private contract?"

Because a company like Salesforce...who is only renting 1/8 of the building...feels like they have "the right" to rename the building after themselves...which they don't.

As stated above. Want a building with your name on it? Then pony up the money...and pay for the whole fucking thing yourself!

11
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: The naming rights of an edifice.........

It's from week and half ago

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/09/12/salesforce_tower/

where the renaming was abandoned. So this adds nothing

1
0
Silver badge

Re: The naming rights of an edifice.........

Yeh, no idea. (But we are all talking about Salesforce!)

1
0
Silver badge

Re: The naming rights of an edifice.........

@AC, "Why do politicians…"

Well, this isn't ordinary politicians, it's the City of London Corporation, which is a sort of club for big business leaders where they can join Guilds and dress up as a medieval pageant. They only control the Square Mile; London County Council has responsibility for the whole London area.

5
0

Re: The naming rights of an edifice.........

Why do politicians have the right to insert themselves in a private contract? Because it isn't a purely private contract is it? Its a public name for a prominent building in a major city. What if the company wished to change the name to Penis Tower? Would that be acceptable?

Whether you like it or not, the local council have control over the buildings in their area.

3
0

Re: The naming rights of an edifice.........

Hang on a minute............... They are Salesforce.com they own the cloud, they own SaaS, they own Sales for all corporations in the known universe.....

They can have what they want when they want it..................

Perhaps they have aspirations to be Wolves of er.... Fishermans Wharf........... doesn't have quite the same ring. Arses!!

Perhaps if the building was more shaped like a limp dick they might stand a better chance of sole occupancy and therefore naming it after themselves.......if they still saw the value in doing so.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: The naming rights of an edifice.........

"London County Council has responsibility for the whole London area"

Not since the 70's when the GLC came, then Mayor Ken changed it again

1
0
Coat

Re: The naming rights of an edifice.........

@localzuk - "What if the company wished to change the name to Penis Tower? Would that be acceptable?"

It would certainly be a more accurate description of the general class of building and the reason for building it :)

[Mine's the one with the phallic symbol in the pocket]

0
0

Re: The naming rights of an edifice.........

Do you work in that building? Do you OWN that building? I thought not.

As I said If the OWNER of the building wants to sell the naming rights to the building, that is HIS/HER right to do so, NOT the governments right.

It does not matter how much of the building they rent moron, if they can pay for it, they can have it IF the OWNER wants to SELL it. Salesforce has the right to buy anything they can pay for.

Stating a fact no matter how much you don't like it, does not mean it's wrong.

The government does not have the right to interfere with a private contract.

0
0
Silver badge
Windows

Re: The naming rights of an edifice.........

@AC, LCC -> GLC - Have an upvote for pointing out my name error, but Mayor Ken didn't abolish the GLC, Thatcher abolished it to get rid of Ken.

So, now the Greater London Authority is the relevant body. Why can't they just stick to one, sensible name… mutter, mutter

0
0

Re: The naming rights of an edifice.........

@Dan Paul - you are confused, it seems. Thing is, in the UK, the government/local council have lots of legal rights. They're enacted via these things we call "laws" and "by laws". This means they DO have the right to prevent a building being renamed. Its as simple as that. They also have the right to kick you out of your own building if you don't comply with local laws too (eg. if you persist with, say, using a property as a drug den, or you have loud parties constantly counter to a noise abatement order).

You're confusing "fact" (in this case, aka "law") with "opinion" (in this case, aka "your view that private contracts are not subject to government regulation").

0
0

Not dominant enough

Welcome to the London of the mid-21st century.

On your right, the Pamela Anderson Dominatrix building, 550 floors, with extra phallic appeal and a roof in the shape of a nipple made out of pure silicon.

Further down the street you see the House of Pain building, erected in 2056. It is 2716 storeys tall...or is it 2718? It seems to be getting taller and taller, the more people bump into its ultra-transparent glass walls.

0
0
Facepalm

They could still call it

Salesforce Tower

Just add 110 Bishopsgate as the next line of the address.......

0
1
Gold badge
Coat

Opportunity missed

I'm so disappointed at the missed opportunity, when there's a far better name on offer. The rather more modest Dan Wagner, CEO of Powa Technologies on the 34th and 35th floors opposed this attempt, but didn't try to rename the building himself. When we could have had:

The Tower of Powa

OK, OK, I'm getting my coat...

1
0

In Reading, at the end of the A329(M), was Oracle Park. Oracle has 5 or 6 large buildings there.

For some reason, when Microsoft moved into the park, it got a bit upset with the name.

And so these days it's called Thames Valley Park :(

0
0

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018