As I'm sure you all know, this is principally a matter of business and what the market bears for rent of that space. Related/Beal, the owner of the building on which the Citgo sign sits, has said it is amenable to keeping the sign, even at a below market rent, but not at the rent that Citgo currently pays. If I'm remembering correctly, the rent they are paying is approximately $500,000 per year, yet the fair market rent for that space is approximately $2,000,000 per year. Related/Beal is willing to rent the space for some amount less than $2MM, but not outrageously less. FWIW, Citgo is enlisting the misty-eyed among you to preserve a massively below market rent. It has nothing to do with nostalgia for them. Related/Beal, having some roots in Boston (the Beals have been developers in Boston for more than 50 years), recognizes the local attachment to the sign, but they have fiduciary duties to investors as well, which they are trying to balance.
