|
sgrizzle
|
 |
« on: October 20, 2008, 06:19:50 am » |
|
The Williams Tower, that was rebranded the BOk Tower, is now bipolar. The building now has BOk AND Williams logos, depending on which side you look at.
Why would BOk make a big deal out of renaming the building, putting up their logo, keep the city from putting a sign on city hall, and then suddenly allow giant Williams signs?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
swake
|
|
« Reply #1 on: October 20, 2008, 07:18:38 am » |
|
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
The Williams Tower, that was rebranded the BOk Tower, is now bipolar. The building now has BOk AND Williams logos, depending on which side you look at.
Why would BOk make a big deal out of renaming the building, putting up their logo, keep the city from putting a sign on city hall, and then suddenly allow giant Williams signs?
Well, for one thing, Williams owns the building. BOk is just a tenant. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
PonderInc
|
|
« Reply #2 on: October 20, 2008, 12:37:17 pm » |
|
The BOK sign on the Williams tower has always confused people. "It's at the Williams Tower, which says BOK on the top. The address is One Williams Center...enter from 1st, 2nd or 3rd and Boston...even though the intersection of 2nd and Boston no longer exists..."
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Oil Capital
|
|
« Reply #3 on: October 20, 2008, 07:54:19 pm » |
|
quote:
Originally posted by swake
quote:
Originally posted by sgrizzle
The Williams Tower, that was rebranded the BOk Tower, is now bipolar. The building now has BOk AND Williams logos, depending on which side you look at.
Why would BOk make a big deal out of renaming the building, putting up their logo, keep the city from putting a sign on city hall, and then suddenly allow giant Williams signs?
Well, for one thing, Williams owns the building. BOk is just a tenant.
. . . and the city owns One Technology Center. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 20, 2008, 07:55:15 pm by Oil Capital »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
inteller
Guest
|
|
« Reply #4 on: October 20, 2008, 08:29:03 pm » |
|
it is all about the terms you buy it under and the city didn't buy it under the right terms.
any sign on that building would look tacky anyways.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Renaissance
|
|
« Reply #5 on: October 20, 2008, 11:52:00 pm » |
|
Well, it's the terms under which we allow BOK to run the master lease. The city gets a good deal of financial protection through that agreement but we gave up too much control. I haven't looked at the document to see what a breach on the city's party would look like, but it's worth consideration--we're the damn landlord, after all.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
T Badd
Guest
|
|
« Reply #6 on: October 21, 2008, 07:46:30 am » |
|
Not to be confused with Williams Center Tower One and Two (AKA Samson Plaza). Yeah, some of these buildings definitely come across as bipolar.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
inteller
Guest
|
|
« Reply #7 on: October 21, 2008, 05:12:47 pm » |
|
quote:
Originally posted by T Badd
Not to be confused with Williams Center Tower One and Two (AKA Samson Plaza). Yeah, some of these buildings definitely come across as bipolar.
you mean Benham....haha would that make it tri polar? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
