I won't try colour your thinking and offer my own written views yet, but I know what they are. Here is the scene. Think of the city that you live in, grew up in, whichever you feel most affinity with. Try not to think of someplace you hate, as that will slant your decision, like I say, select the city that you have most of a bond with. Now imagine this. A large corp, or even an individual perhaps, comes along and says that directly to your city coffers, and to be used in a manner that the public the city could decide how best to spend, they would annually donate a large sum of money, however, in return, they would wish to formally change the name of your town or city, to either their brand, or their surname, if that were applicable. Assume that the monies would be paid fairly, every year, and that whatever other objections you may have, the monies did indeed permit things to happen in your city, that there otherwise was not the funding for. I will run as a poll with a few options please vote AND comment, not just one!
In the poll I selected: "Sure. In the end, whats in a name," and, "If good came of it, then yes." The deal would need to be attractive, a large majority of the townsfolk willing to vote in support of it, and the people of the town given ample opportunity to negotiate with the buyer to arrive at a name acceptable to both the community at large and the buyer. At some point - at least within the bounds of reasonably nice names - the quality of local public goods and services, and the overall development of the town probably ought to be considered more important than folks preserving its original name or current alias.
i think it would be pretty stupid to be honest. if this crap started happening cities wouldnt be cities anymore, they would literally be giant billboards for companies. the last thing i want to say is "im going on vacation to Pepsi" .
I live in Providence. And TPTB here sold us out years ago. Even if they didn't, I doubt that they could give it away.
