Vikings are suing Wells Fargo for photobombing their new stadium

The stadium news world has clearly decided this week to transition from tragedy to farce: First the mentally disturbed man who somehow claimed the lease to the San Diego Padres stadium, and now the Minnesota Vikings are suing Wells Fargo Bank for photobombing their new stadium:

“Wells Fargo has recently started installing mounted and illuminated roof top signs that do not conform to the parties agreement in an effort to permanently ‘photo bomb’ the image of the iconic U.S. Bank Stadium,” the lawsuit said. “The prohibited action must be stopped immediately.”

The Wells Fargo signs are atop a pair of new buildings the bank is building alongside the under-construction Vikings stadium — which, you’ll recall, got a naming-rights deal with a competing bank (U.S. Bank). Since they’re part of the same larger development, the Vikings got to set conditions for the types of signage that Wells Fargo would erect, and ultimately agreed to allow two non-illuminated signs that were painted on the roof, not raised. Since then, however, Wells Fargo tried to amend the agreement to allow for lit signs, saying if it was denied, it would respond by simply “lighting the entire roof of each tower, including the signs.”

There’s surely some wording deep within the agreement that will determine who prevails in court, but right now let’s just enjoy the hilarity of a football team suing a neighboring building for putting up giant roof logos that it’s afraid will distract from its own giant roof logos.


3 comments on “Vikings are suing Wells Fargo for photobombing their new stadium

  1. I find this fascinating and hilarious in so many ways. The obvious move would have been limiting it to a single financial institution as a major tenant on the site. If it were YOUR bank would you want a major competitor with huge signs right by your stadium? But would you want a skyscraper that you couldn’t put your name on prominently? This whole situation was just inviting this exact scenario to play out.

    And from a legal perspective it’s actually pretty darn clever for them to go with the “we’re just lighting the roof of our building which happens to hold a big sign of ours” argument. If the contract isn’t carefully worded that just may carry the day.

  2. And how do they turn off the sun in the daytime so eyes won’t be corrupted by the Wells Fargo signs?