HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

Creative CBA solutions? Do you have one? Have you seen any?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-13-2012, 02:44 AM
  #201
JAX
Registered User
 
JAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sault Ste. Marie
Country: Canada
Posts: 896
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TravisUlrich View Post
With the way discussions are going, my hunch is that the NHLPA is preparing to map out all the minor CBA issues and win as many of those as they can while losing the big economic issue. After all, once the lockout goes into mid-November, they will have lost more money than they can recoup... And let's face it, the players will eventually fold.
And that's why I thought at first but I think Fehr is a master manipulator and really has these guys dupped. I think the year is gone but this time the players won't fold I actually think if they go the year this time they will be out for blood and Fehr will easily go 2 years to "win"

JAX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2012, 03:00 AM
  #202
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAX View Post
And that's why I thought at first but I think Fehr is a master manipulator and really has these guys dupped. I think the year is gone but this time the players won't fold I actually think if they go the year this time they will be out for blood and Fehr will easily go 2 years to "win"
I do think that if Fehr goes for 2 that he will be surprised.

I could see GB going with a counter for year 2. Sign before Sept. 15 or season 2 is toast. Fehr will have a huge issue with the lower end as 2 years much less one will close out a LOT of careers. If the older guys are still voting . . .

I also see the long lockout as making it even more certain that linkage will be retained and would not be surprised to see the league become more intractable about a higher percentage for owners as a lot of their expenses are fixed and will suffer with a lower total HRR.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2012, 09:49 AM
  #203
Oleg Petrov
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,121
vCash: 500
Easy 50/50 Hrr split. League & PA agree on 10 initiatives to be taken by the league that will increase revenues. If all 10 initiatives have not been implemented by a certain date then the PA can choose to end the CBA, if they all have been initiated then the NHL can extend the agreement or choose to renegotiate.

Initiatives with all revenue being included in HRR with the exception of expansion fees:
- NHL run world cup every 4th year.
- world club cup hosted during the pre season
- expand to 2 Canadian cities
- expand the outdoor games
- negotiate a new Canadian tv deal
- expand the Playoff fOrmat
Etc

Oleg Petrov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2012, 12:20 PM
  #204
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 56,983
vCash: 500
One flaw in table on previous page -- there's no way the HRR will be $3.3B. At least $250mm has been lost already. And with fan apathy (turning to fan anger), I expect a downturn (should there even be hockey by 11/1). And the longer things go, the less revenue there is to split.

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2012, 02:10 PM
  #205
madhi19
Registered User
 
madhi19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Cold and Dark place!
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,372
vCash: 500
Rick Mercer solution in 2002! I so want him to do another of those video now!

madhi19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2012, 03:52 PM
  #206
ps241
Hero of CantonKiller
 
ps241's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 12,099
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouser View Post
What would my ideal new CBA look like?

Big Picture Stuff

- Keep the same definition of HRR.

- Split 50/50 between owners and players.

- If the 2012 season had started reasonably on time I would have preferred a one year bridge to get down to 50%. With what's looking to be at least a partial lost season two year bridge is okay. Year 1 it's a 55/45 Player/Owner split, Year 2 is 52/48 and Year 3+ is 50/50.

- CBA length similar to 2005 terms, including NHLPA options.


Salary Cap

- Use the same formula to establish the cap midpoint.

- Either set the cap ceiling to $6m over the midpoint (currently $8m) or 10% over the midpoint. The reason behind this is to reduce the likelihood that players will lose a portion of their salaries via escrow. In most years of the past CBA the players did so--the salary cap was set too high more often then not.

- If the NHLPA desires to lower the salary cap ceiling calculation even further so most years the owners will be paying extra to the players instead of vice versa that would be okay. It would best be done in the base formula though, as past history shows the optional yearly inflator was always used, even when it probably shouldn't have.

- What should salary cap floor be set to? What would be the maximum gap of spending that allows lower revenue teams some budgetary discretion while maintaining a reasonable envelope of payroll competitiveness across the league. Reading some various articles on MLB's situation back in the early 2000's when the top portion of teams were averaging a 2:1 ratio over the bottom portion the league set a goal of moving to a 1.6:1 ratio (62.5% of the ceiling). I think that's a reasonable figure that approximately matches the cap situation in 2006-2007, the first year the CBA's $16m range was used where the $28m floor was 63.6% of the $44m ceiling.

- Between my suggestion to reduce the ceiling calc and adjust the floor calc if a 50/50 HRR share were in place for 2012-2013 and the 5% escalator remains in place that would have yielded a cap of $60.6m and floor of $37.9m. Note: I'm proposing to phase in the 50/50 target over more than one year but wanted to highlight what the cap would have looked like with an immediate 50/50 split. With the proposed 55% in year 1 that would give a cap of $66.1m and floor of $41.3m for 2012-2013.


Closing Loopholes

- Maximum player contract length of 7 years. That should be enough to close most of the retirement deal shenanigans in a simple way.

- Teams can loan players on 1-way contracts to the minor leagues at no penalty if the player's salary is 50% or less of league average. Players on 1-way contracts greater than 50% of league average can still be loaned, but a portion of the contract will count against the team's cap. Suggestion would be dollar for dollar over 50% of league average salary, but willing to negotiate. This will allow teams to still take risks on signing potentially fringe roster players to 1-way contracts without penalty while reducing the incentive to bury large contracts for cap reasons.

- Remove the 35+ rule, but introduce a new system to address the concerns that caused the rule to be created as well as the retirement contracts. If a player aged 30+ retires for any reason while still having future seasons remaining on their contract then any teams the player played for will have a cap hit assigned to them equal to the difference between the player's salary and cap hit during the period they played with the team. This cap hit will be spread equally across either half the # of years the player played for the team (rounded up) or the years left remaining on the contract, whichever is smaller. This idea would work similarly to how the buyout process assigns a cap hit to a team that accounts for over or underpayment of salary compared to cap hit. For example, if Zach Parise (contract of 12/12/11/9/9/9/9/9/8/6/2/1/1) decides to retire after year 10 of his contract he would have been paid a total of $94m while only carrying a total cap hit of $75.4m. That $18.6m difference will be assessed against the team's cap at $6.2m/year in years 11-13. If a player is traded during their contract then all teams the player paid for are assessed according to the salary received vs. contract for the period that played for the team.


Free Agency and Contract Terms

- Keep the existing ELC structure.

- Continue proportional increases in the ELC maximum contract size similar to 2005 CBA. Increase league minimum from current $550k to $650k or $750k over life of CBA.

- UFA after 8 accrued seasons or at age 28. This is a bump of one year over the current 7 seasons or age 27.

- Open to further restricting or eliminating team-elected arbitration arbitration as a concession to players.


Escrow and Player Salaries

- No rollbacks to player contracts, unless the NHLPA would prefer to do so. The players are going to get their negotiated % of the pie regardless. A rollback only affects what portion of that pie goes to players currently under contract versus players on new future contracts.

- Escrow system otherwise the same.

- As noted earlier, willing to negotiate a solution where escrow clawback becomes very unlikely to be triggered, but that will require pushing the cap lower.


Revenue Sharing

- If the current revenue sharing calculation model continues to be used, raise the % of revenue sharing from it's current 4.5% (~$150m/year) to ~8% (~$260m/year). With increasing central revenue from the new TV deals it should be possible to achieve much of this increase without substantial hikes on the direct revenue sharing payments from the top clubs. Depending on the exact amounts that are available for funding this % increase could be phased in over more than one year.

- Increase the market size thresholds permitted to receive revenue sharing to include the same list of cities as it was initially in the 2005 CBA (Toronto, NY area, Los Angeles, Chicago)

- If a different system for sharing revenue is used then a completely different set of math and %'s would be required.


Misc Topics

- NHL will continue to allow its players to participate in the Olympics.
For the most part I really like the bones of this outline. The phasing in might need to be more gradual but it is well thought out. Now getting it past the players might be a little tough but cudo's on the effort

You heard it from me first Mouser, my guess is that the next Canadian National TV deal will get you all the way to your 8% and then some as far as rev sharing goes. Those regional TV deals being shared is going to be a challenge I think but interesting.


Last edited by ps241: 10-13-2012 at 04:45 PM.
ps241 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2012, 04:17 PM
  #207
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
One flaw in table on previous page -- there's no way the HRR will be $3.3B. At least $250mm has been lost already. And with fan apathy (turning to fan anger), I expect a downturn (should there even be hockey by 11/1). And the longer things go, the less revenue there is to split.
Fair point.

Riptide is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2012, 05:21 PM
  #208
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,506
vCash: 500
Link revenue sharing to the cap floor/ceiling. That is, create a system where, post-revenue sharing, the ratio of cap to floor is the same as the ratio of poorest team to richest team.


Last edited by haseoke39: 10-13-2012 at 06:00 PM.
haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2012, 05:38 PM
  #209
Chubros
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,159
vCash: 500
Here's something creative: the PA actual begins to negotiate and presents a counteroffer to the NHL's last proposal.

They don't need to give up much in terms of numbers yet, just begin to negotiate in a framework that makes sense. If they really don't want to take an immediate cut, include that in the proposal and make it clear that that is the most important thing to them. Something like:

Year 1: players receive the lesser of 57% of HRR or $64.3M/team. (The lessor of part is necessary to prorate for a shortened season)

Years 2-4: players receive the greater of 55% of HRR or $64.3M/team.

Years 5-8: players receive the greater of 53% of HRR or $64.3M/team.

The NHL wouldn't like the numbers, but at least it might be a framework they could negotiate around. After a series of counterproposals, perhaps things end up being:

Year 1: same as above, with a one time, one year revenue sharing plan in place to help struggling franchises.

Year 2-8: 50/50

Done and done. Game on!

Chubros is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 09:13 PM
  #210
No Fehr
Registered User
 
No Fehr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 115
vCash: 500
Calling all legal and math\money folk

My idea is to put together a CBA proposal. I believe that on this forum we have enough people with varying work backgrounds to do so. I need people willing to say I have done X before and I can help.

I know with my PR and public speaking I can get an audience with the PA and NHL. I can get this done(I could use help if anyone has experience) what I can't do is put together a real CBA framework, I have zero experience with this.

You need to understand that the NHL is unlike any business you have ever worked for or owned. For example if I had a hamburger joint and I went to McDonald's and said: "It is not fair that you can buy your product in mega bulk amounts to get prices far better then mine, I want you to give me $1K every month to make up for that(profit sharing)." For this maybe someone that has market(s&p 500, ect)knowledge. It is well known that the NHL is 30 competing business acting as one or just how the business model itself will lead to inflated player contracts but that is not all. We need to figure out the real problems with the NHL and address them in away that both sides will not hate and will see the logic in.

If your pro-PA/owners then you need to keep that out and just be pro-hockey.
To keep it organized maybe if you think of a problem then start a new thread, get ideas for said problem then keep in your opening message updates on that problem.
To the mods if this takes off could we have a locked thread that only updates with finished topics/articles for the CBA? Also whatever you(mods) think is the best way for this not to be a nonsensical thread, please note it.

If you can just respond with what you can do, contracts/contract law, numbers/accounting, ect... So we can group people by skill.

We can continue to debate what will happen or we can work together and get something done.

No Fehr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:43 PM
  #211
Lowe in Oil
Registered User
 
Lowe in Oil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,583
vCash: 500
The players want a "make whole deal", they want the money they signed for. Who wouldn't? Weber signs for 13 years, Parise, Suter, Kovalchuk, Crosby.. the list goes on of recent long term deals. These guys JUST SIGNED LT CONTRACTS so by cutting their salaries the owners are screwing them bigtime!!

My idea: 50-50 split in HRR But contracts that exceed the expiration period of this CBA (contracts 5 years or more, whatever the CBA term is) do NOT get rolled back. I mean c'mon. Why the hell would anyone do that? I sign a 13 year contract and for the next 13 years I have to give up 10%? No one would do that. If the contract is 2-3 years, you suck it up.

So if a team has a player like Weber, signed past the 5 years of the CBA, they get a certain allowance to go over the salary-cap. I have not done the math and just thinking about it seems complex, plus I am not getting paid for this so I will not do it lol, but to me it seems fair for players with LT contracts and owners.

GET THIS DONE!! SERIOUSLY!!

Do you hear that? 3.3 Billion dollars getting flushed down the toilet.


Lowe in Oil.

Lowe in Oil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:56 PM
  #212
haseoke39
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 6,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fehr View Post
My idea is to put together a CBA proposal. I believe that on this forum we have enough people with varying work backgrounds to do so. I need people willing to say I have done X before and I can help.

I know with my PR and public speaking I can get an audience with the PA and NHL. I can get this done(I could use help if anyone has experience) what I can't do is put together a real CBA framework, I have zero experience with this.

You need to understand that the NHL is unlike any business you have ever worked for or owned. For example if I had a hamburger joint and I went to McDonald's and said: "It is not fair that you can buy your product in mega bulk amounts to get prices far better then mine, I want you to give me $1K every month to make up for that(profit sharing)." For this maybe someone that has market(s&p 500, ect)knowledge. It is well known that the NHL is 30 competing business acting as one or just how the business model itself will lead to inflated player contracts but that is not all. We need to figure out the real problems with the NHL and address them in away that both sides will not hate and will see the logic in.

If your pro-PA/owners then you need to keep that out and just be pro-hockey.
To keep it organized maybe if you think of a problem then start a new thread, get ideas for said problem then keep in your opening message updates on that problem.
To the mods if this takes off could we have a locked thread that only updates with finished topics/articles for the CBA? Also whatever you(mods) think is the best way for this not to be a nonsensical thread, please note it.

If you can just respond with what you can do, contracts/contract law, numbers/accounting, ect... So we can group people by skill.

We can continue to debate what will happen or we can work together and get something done.
1. You don't have any ideas.
2. You don't have any contacts within the NHL or NHLPA.
3. You don't realize that a creative idea isn't necessary or helpful here. There is one question here: how much money will owners pay to players? The RS question is a side tangent, so maybe two questions, tops. Dressing up whatever the figure is in creative ways actually probably hurts negotiations, because it obfuscates what the real math is. This is simply a test of wills, not of ideas. And if the players were rational economic actors, they'd have lost that test by now.

haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 11:11 PM
  #213
ps241
Hero of CantonKiller
 
ps241's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 12,099
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
1. You don't have any ideas.
2. You don't have any contacts within the NHL or NHLPA.
3. You don't realize that a creative idea isn't necessary or helpful here. There is one question here: how much money will owners pay to players? The RS question is a side tangent, so maybe two questions, tops. Dressing up whatever the figure is in creative ways actually probably hurts negotiations, because it obfuscates what the real math is. This is simply a test of wills, not of ideas. And if the players were rational economic actors, they'd have lost that test by now.
You have begun to identify some obstacles that appear to be getting in the way of a deal currently and that is a good start.

ps241 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-27-2012, 03:05 AM
  #214
No Fehr
Registered User
 
No Fehr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 115
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
1. You don't have any ideas.
2. You don't have any contacts within the NHL or NHLPA.
3. You don't realize that a creative idea isn't necessary or helpful here. There is one question here: how much money will owners pay to players? The RS question is a side tangent, so maybe two questions, tops. Dressing up whatever the figure is in creative ways actually probably hurts negotiations, because it obfuscates what the real math is. This is simply a test of wills, not of ideas. And if the players were rational economic actors, they'd have lost that test by now.
I do have ideas but that is not my expertise. I can get an audience with the entities involved. Do I have contacts? No but I have learned that helps but is not that important. It is all how you present yourself.
You have a good idea and that is what I'm looking for getting to the nuts of it all but I don't want a bunch of misplaced ideas I want a team of people asking for these ideas in an organized way and turning them into working ideas.
The big thing I'm betting on is I can get steam and neither party wants to look bad in the press.
In PR it is funny how many people lack confidence and how much gets done with a well written letter/phone call and confidence.
A good deal neither party will like but will live with.

No Fehr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-27-2012, 03:09 AM
  #215
No Fehr
Registered User
 
No Fehr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 115
vCash: 500
not to be a jerk, but I'm not looking for ideas yet just people and moving this thread is just de-railing it. I like this thread, I posted on it but it is not what I want to do right now.

No Fehr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-28-2012, 02:48 PM
  #216
speeds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: St.Albert
Posts: 6,823
vCash: 500
http://www.insidethebook.com/ee/inde...ng_those_year/

speeds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-29-2012, 12:25 PM
  #217
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 56,983
vCash: 500
SiriusXM NHL Network Radio on Tuesday noon ET/9am PT -- host will present his CBA proposal.


(For those who want to listen in)

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-30-2012, 05:56 PM
  #218
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,537
vCash: 500
Here's a piece of what should be in the next CBA. Make it indefinite. Stop points every 6 years for major negotiations. No strike/no lockout during those negotiations. All players receive NHL minimum salaries until settlement. All teams contribute previous year's rev share + player salary payouts + 5% - player payouts to escrow pool. Money is held independently in escrow until negotiations are complete. Both sides can agree to modifications to the CBA in any year even without the stop points.

Feel free to shoot this down.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-30-2012, 07:13 PM
  #219
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,305
vCash: 500
All future money battles around percent of revenues and HRR definitions that cant be settled through negotiation, are settled quietly through an agreed upon dispute resolution mechanism that no fan ever needs to hear about again. The next side to trigger a strike or lockout buys all the seats for all the next 20 games of all the teams when they return. Snap back to that!

thinkwild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 03:36 PM
  #220
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 56,983
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
SiriusXM NHL Network Radio on Tuesday noon ET/9am PT -- host will present his CBA proposal.

(For those who want to listen in)
http://www.siriusxmnhl.com/2012/11/0...r-negotiation/

And here it is in blog form. 8 years. 50-50. "Make whole" within three years. UFA after 7 years/age 26. Max contract length 7 years. "2nd contract" limitations (6% max of cap).


(It'll be repeated on 11/2 1pm ET if you want to listen.

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 04:09 PM
  #221
crazyforhockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,582
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Here's a piece of what should be in the next CBA. Make it indefinite. Stop points every 6 years for major negotiations. No strike/no lockout during those negotiations. All players receive NHL minimum salaries until settlement. All teams contribute previous year's rev share + player salary payouts + 5% - player payouts to escrow pool. Money is held independently in escrow until negotiations are complete. Both sides can agree to modifications to the CBA in any year even without the stop points.

Feel free to shoot this down.
since the players dont use the strike process (yet)

then it comes down to whether Bettman and owners want to give up their biggest club to forcing their agenda....

bottom line------ no way the NHL ever agrees to that

crazyforhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 07:31 PM
  #222
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyforhockey View Post
since the players dont use the strike process (yet)

then it comes down to whether Bettman and owners want to give up their biggest club to forcing their agenda....

bottom line------ no way the NHL ever agrees to that
They had a strike in 94.

I agree that the NHL doesn't want to give up its club. However, publicizing a PA proposal of a similarly worded clause to be attached to the CBA would be a major PR victory. I tried to puzzle together a mechanism that would hurt both sides a little to provide an incentive to come to agreement. It just annoys me no end that the legal community (union and management) buys into a mechanism, strike/lockout, that hurts both sides in the long run. They really need something/someone to break up the group think around work stoppages because the thinking has become detached from reality (works against the self-interest of both sides in all cases, no matter who wins).

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 08:56 PM
  #223
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,641
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
They had a strike in 94.
1992. 1994 was a Lockout.

kdb209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 09:52 PM
  #224
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
1992. 1994 was a Lockout.
Missed again, but there was a strike.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-01-2012, 11:16 PM
  #225
Cawz
Registered User
 
Cawz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Oiler fan in Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,180
vCash: 500
The owners should make an offer where they pay contracts in full (from PA's offer) then split the revenues 50-50 (from owners offer), and the difference is made up by the players paying for everything themselves (flights, meals, equipment, hotels, insurance, medical bills, ice time...).

Players get their contracts paid in full, like they want, and they get to play hockey, like they want. Plus they get to be like the every-day person by paying for everything. Since they are constantly trying to relate to us by saying "how would you like it if your boss tried to lower your salary", maybe they should actually have a deal that treats them more like us.

Either that, or concede to the owners deal with minor tweaks, and demand Bettman resign. That can be their win, since they apparently all hate the commish.

Cawz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:28 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.