HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2012-13 Lockout Discussion Part VII: The Last Waltz "Cut the sheet & drop the puck!"

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-16-2012, 09:24 AM
  #1
BBKers
Registered User
 
BBKers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: South Koster, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 5,680
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to BBKers
2012-13 Lockout Discussion Part VII: The Last Waltz "Cut the sheet & drop the puck!"

Carry on,,,
Last thread??

BBKers is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 09:32 AM
  #2
BlueShirts88
Section 208 Row 15
 
BlueShirts88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 10,346
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BlueShirts88
Part 7 and counting. This is not good.

__________________
"Matteau! Matteau! Matteau!"~H. Rose
BlueShirts88 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 09:37 AM
  #3
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,012
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riche16 View Post
I don't think it was ever about the players "gaining" anything in this CBA. Fact of the matter is that they've had it way too good for a long time now...
If the players haev had it too good for too long, then why is it mentioned everywhere about what a great job that Bettman did for the owners and how he is reponsible for record profits?
Quote:
The league isn't healthy. One of the reasons is the 57% - 43% they've been enjoying for a while.
Again, if it is so unhealthy, they why, up until the actually locked the players out, have we heard about how great the league is and how much revenue that they are bringing in? As soon as the padlock went on, everyone is crying poverty again. Let's not forget that NO ONE has seen an NHL audited financial statement.
Quote:
The league wants a fair 50/50... They've moved towards the players, significantly on rev sharing (something the league def needed to become more solvent).
The players agreed to a 50/50, with the caveat that the owners pay for the contracts that they signed. The owners get their 50/50, just gradually.
Quote:
The various contract issues are to keep GMs in check. Do they need ALL of the contract concessions they're asking for? No. But they need something to stop the circumventing contracts.
GM's or owners that constantly seek to circuvent their own rules to get a competitive advantage?
Quote:
The players are going to lose. No matter how you slice it. They have a lot to lose just to make it fair tho.
The players are going to loose, but they will ensure that the owners cut off their own nose in the process. Owning an NHL team is not petty cash as some uniformed posters like to imagine. This is a business. The midpoint of the teams si around $200 million. That is A LOT of money. And for those business to be driven to the point of bankruptcy is going to be a "loss" for the owners as well.
Quote:
I don't see the owners asking for very much that isn't fair.
The are demanding and not asking. There is not a single concession to the players. And asking for the owners to pay the contracts that they signes is not unfair.

True Blue is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 09:41 AM
  #4
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,012
vCash: 500
Quote:
This is laughable.

They've been listening to Fehr for 2 months, you think it'll last 2 years?! You think the 90% of the PA that cant get a job overseas is going to go that long without an NHL paycheck? Again, laughable.
Yes, I think that the players are SO pi$$ed off at Bettman and the owners, that, yes they will. They lost a season, got bent over in the last negotiations, and are now being squezzed again with disengenous contracts. They hired Fehr for a reason. They will drink the kool-aide and, if necessary, they will loose two years. I do not think that they owners are willing to fold the NHL, which is what will happen if 2 years are lost.
Quote:
Several of the owners operate at a loss - these guys are actually saving money by having no hockey played.
Sure, but they have sold tickets. Once the fixed costs continue and the rent needs to be paid, and not a single ticket is sold, that is quite a big difference. And your statement was definetly true in 2004. But not as much now.

True Blue is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 09:47 AM
  #5
HatTrick Swayze
Tomato Potato
 
HatTrick Swayze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,349
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
Yes, I think that the players are SO pi$$ed off at Bettman and the owners, that, yes they will. They lost a season, got bent over in the last negotiations, and are now being squezzed again with disengenous contracts. They hired Fehr for a reason. They will drink the kool-aide and, if necessary, they will loose two years. I do not think that they owners are willing to fold the NHL, which is what will happen if 2 years are lost.

Sure, but they have sold tickets. Once the fixed costs continue and the rent needs to be paid, and not a single ticket is sold, that is quite a big difference. And your statement was definetly true in 2004. But not as much now.
So Brandon Prust (for example) is going to give up $5M of the $10M payday he just hit? A payday he will never sniff again?

Henrik Lundqvist, the insane competitor he is, is gonna flush two years of prime stat production and Cup contention down the toilet?

Mike Rupp and Marty Biron are basically gonna agree to retire and be replaced by younger kids?

Yea good luck selling that Fehr. Its not gonna happen and tp think that the players can "win" or somehow stick it to Bettman by holding out longer is laughable IMO. They will hurt themselves just as bad if not worse.

__________________
"Here we can see the agression of american people. They love fighting and guns. when they wont win they try to kill us all." -HalfOfFame
HatTrick Swayze is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 09:55 AM
  #6
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,811
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
Yes, I think that the players are SO pi$$ed off at Bettman and the owners, that, yes they will. They lost a season, got bent over in the last negotiations, and are now being squezzed again with disengenous contracts. They hired Fehr for a reason. They will drink the kool-aide and, if necessary, they will loose two years. I do not think that they owners are willing to fold the NHL, which is what will happen if 2 years are lost.

Sure, but they have sold tickets. Once the fixed costs continue and the rent needs to be paid, and not a single ticket is sold, that is quite a big difference. And your statement was definetly true in 2004. But not as much now.
Ahh, yes, the biggest misconception of them all - that the players got bent over last time. The NHL stuck it to them with the 24% rollback at the beginning of the last CBA, but thats about it. They operated under a deal where players garnered 57% of revenues - revenues that increased by over $1B since the last lockout. How is that getting bent over?

Bettman got his cap and thought he got his victory - in truth it was a very bad deal for the owners - especially the smaller market ones.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 10:22 AM
  #7
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,012
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HatTrick Swayze View Post
Yea good luck selling that Fehr. Its not gonna happen and tp think that the players can "win" or somehow stick it to Bettman by holding out longer is laughable IMO. They will hurt themselves just as bad if not worse.
Just how I read the tea leaves. The players did not hire Fehr for no reason. And certainly not for loosing a season, just to get bent over in the end. I do not care how competitive they are, they did not bring Fehr on just to repeat 2004. I believe that they will hold and will hold strong. Fehr WILL sell them making the owners stare at a season with not a single ticket sold.

I did not say that they will "stick it" to Bettman. I said that they will force the owners to cut their noses off, just to spite their face. And yes, I think that their hatred of Bettman has galvanized them that much.

True Blue is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 10:25 AM
  #8
Kreider Typical
flex
 
Kreider Typical's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,548
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Ahh, yes, the biggest misconception of them all - that the players got bent over last time. The NHL stuck it to them with the 24% rollback at the beginning of the last CBA, but thats about it. They operated under a deal where players garnered 57% of revenues - revenues that increased by over $1B since the last lockout. How is that getting bent over?

Bettman got his cap and thought he got his victory - in truth it was a very bad deal for the owners - especially the smaller market ones.
exactly right. it was an extremely solid deal for the owners at the time, but there was no way in hell that anybody projected the level of growth that they've had. they were trying to stick it to the players and it backfired.

truth is-- the owners should be ecstatic about the growth-- not trying to stick it to the players. the owners should be extremely happy with what has happened and take their increased profits happily. that's not to say that all owners won with the cap... the smaller venues kind of got screwed... WHICH is why they should just implement profit sharing-- but they don't want to take from the few teams who control the league and did their jobs better than the rest.

BUT...

on the other hand, after our last lockout, we saw 30% growth... so they don't entirely have to worry about this year's missed profits if the trend continues.

we'll see what happens, but honestly, the owners won the last cba's debates regardless of what happened under it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
THey got bent over, becuase essentially the owners dictated their terms. How it turned out, is anotehr story. And as for how poorly the teams are really faring, again, not even Leavitt saw the actual financial statements. NO ONE has. Leavit reported on the numbers presented to him. Forbes reported on the numbers reported to them. I am not saying that there are small market teams that are not faring well, but I am saying that there are many more teams that are making money than last time. Again, it is a little fishy that you crow about how healthy the league is and laud about your record revenues, and then cry poverty as soon as the pad lock goes on.
the billion dollar question... where did those profits go?

Kreider Typical is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 10:26 AM
  #9
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,012
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Ahh, yes, the biggest misconception of them all - that the players got bent over last time. The NHL stuck it to them with the 24% rollback at the beginning of the last CBA, but thats about it. They operated under a deal where players garnered 57% of revenues - revenues that increased by over $1B since the last lockout. How is that getting bent over?

Bettman got his cap and thought he got his victory - in truth it was a very bad deal for the owners - especially the smaller market ones.
THey got bent over, becuase essentially the owners dictated their terms. How it turned out, is anotehr story. And as for how poorly the teams are really faring, again, not even Leavitt saw the actual financial statements. NO ONE has. Leavit reported on the numbers presented to him. Forbes reported on the numbers reported to them. I am not saying that there are small market teams that are not faring well, but I am saying that there are many more teams that are making money than last time. Again, it is a little fishy that you crow about how healthy the league is and laud about your record revenues, and then cry poverty as soon as the pad lock goes on.

True Blue is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 10:36 AM
  #10
HatTrick Swayze
Tomato Potato
 
HatTrick Swayze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,349
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
Just how I read the tea leaves. The players did not hire Fehr for no reason. And certainly not for loosing a season, just to get bent over in the end. I do not care how competitive they are, they did not bring Fehr on just to repeat 2004. I believe that they will hold and will hold strong. Fehr WILL sell them making the owners stare at a season with not a single ticket sold.

I did not say that they will "stick it" to Bettman. I said that they will force the owners to cut their noses off, just to spite their face. And yes, I think that their hatred of Bettman has galvanized them that much.
I just dont see it happening. I dont think the PA will be able to stave off immediate financial self-interest for 1.5-2 years. Especially not with their wives chirping in their other ear.

We'll have to agree to disagree.

HatTrick Swayze is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 10:36 AM
  #11
ltrangerfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post

I did not say that they will "stick it" to Bettman. I said that they will force the owners to cut their noses off, just to spite their face. And yes, I think that their hatred of Bettman has galvanized them that much.


You've just described the nuclear winter very well.

The players cost the owners money but unfortunately they cost themselves just as much if not more. So everyone cuts their nose off.

When this lockout ends, the billionaire owners might have diminished franchise value (?) but will still be billionaires. As for the players some might have lost pay that they actually might need?

It's tough for a millionaire who wishes to play no limit poker against a billionaire.

ltrangerfan is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 10:37 AM
  #12
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,477
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Ahh, yes, the biggest misconception of them all - that the players got bent over last time. The NHL stuck it to them with the 24% rollback at the beginning of the last CBA, but thats about it. They operated under a deal where players garnered 57% of revenues - revenues that increased by over $1B since the last lockout. How is that getting bent over?

Bettman got his cap and thought he got his victory - in truth it was a very bad deal for the owners - especially the smaller market ones.
Worked out for them in the long run, but at the time, the owners certainly bent the players over. 24% rollback AND a hard-cap system, not to mention the other victories for the ownership? That's a serious blow to the NHLPA.

Trxjw is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 10:40 AM
  #13
Pizza
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 9,961
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HatTrick Swayze View Post
So Brandon Prust (for example) is going to give up $5M of the $10M payday he just hit? A payday he will never sniff again?

Henrik Lundqvist, the insane competitor he is, is gonna flush two years of prime stat production and Cup contention down the toilet?

Mike Rupp and Marty Biron are basically gonna agree to retire and be replaced by younger kids?

Yea good luck selling that Fehr. Its not gonna happen and tp think that the players can "win" or somehow stick it to Bettman by holding out longer is laughable IMO. They will hurt themselves just as bad if not worse.
Hat, what you have just laid out is the hammer that the owners have to beat the players down with. I'm not typically a guy that roots for unions, but this it seems is a bit less than bargaining in good faith.

If the players know that every time they make a deal they are in essence screwing themselves, then how does this league move forward?

It seems to me that the two sides are failing to focus, honestly on what helps keep the NHL viable as a product and a business. They are strictly focused on their own interest.....to the exclusion of what kind of deal prevents a lock out every few years.

Pizza is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 10:48 AM
  #14
Lundsanity30
Registered User
 
Lundsanity30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,357
vCash: 500
Most likely this will be the last thread before the season is officially lost.

Lundsanity30 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 10:48 AM
  #15
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,811
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mooskating View Post



the billion dollar question... where did those profits go?
Thats just it.

When nearly 60% of revenues are going to the players, its difficult to turn a profit, especially if you're not in NYC, Toronto, or any other huge markets.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 10:52 AM
  #16
WhipNash27
Quattro!!
 
WhipNash27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westchester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 15,519
vCash: 500
This is kind of like the Hostess situation. Maybe when the league folds and the players are making $0 they'll realize what they had.

WhipNash27 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 10:56 AM
  #17
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,811
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
Again, it is a little fishy that you crow about how healthy the league is and laud about your record revenues, and then cry poverty as soon as the pad lock goes on.
Its only fishy if you drink the PA's kool-aid and think that revenue is inextricably linked to profits.

Its not when you're running a business - it is, however, if you're a player. Play hockey, go home, collect your guaranteed paycheck. If the PA got out of their bubble and realized that the world of business doesnt work that way, maybe it'd lead to more meaningful discussion.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:03 AM
  #18
ltrangerfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Thats just it.

When nearly 60% of revenues are going to the players, its difficult to turn a profit, especially if you're not in NYC, Toronto, or any other huge markets.
As I said, when I paid $1000 for hockey tix to MSG how much indirectly went to the players? $570?

ltrangerfan is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:21 AM
  #19
gravey9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Ahh, yes, the biggest misconception of them all - that the players got bent over last time. The NHL stuck it to them with the 24% rollback at the beginning of the last CBA, but thats about it. They operated under a deal where players garnered 57% of revenues - revenues that increased by over $1B since the last lockout. How is that getting bent over?

Bettman got his cap and thought he got his victory - in truth it was a very bad deal for the owners - especially the smaller market ones.
Actually, BEFORE the lockout of 04-05 the players earned 74% of hockey related revenue. So, yes, the players made major concessions - much of which they got back because of growth over the years.

That said, players on an individual basis, did not necessarily make more than they made 7 years ago. For instance, Bobby Holik, a 3rd line center, had just signed a deal with the Rangers that would have paid him 9 million annually. Nowadays, the younger versions of Holik, a guy like Brandon Dubinsky who is either a 3rd line C or a 2nd line right wing gets paid $4 a year and he's constant trade bait because $4 mil is too much for a 3rd line center under the salary cap. So, half the money, and much less job security. So, going to a cap and the roll back have had a major impact on half the leagues' individual players.

You can sit here and debate what the overall shares are for owners and players. But when you get into the details of it all, the 3rd and 4th line players and 3-6 Dmen around the league are just going to get squeezed more and more. Keep in mind, this cba is only a 5 year deal. if this keeps up, and the players keep making concessions, the heart and soul guys like Prust and Fedotenko will make a better living and have more longevity playing in Europe. At the end of the day, most of those guys have 5-7 years or so to make as much money as they can at the thing they do best in life.

And also keep in mind, if they pass the Wade Redden rule where AHL salaries over 125,000 will count against the cap, you can pretty much say goodbye to teams having any call-up depth in the minor leagues. All those AHL veterans that are the first call-ups like Newbury, Kolarik, Gilroy - they will almost all definitely leave for overseas. I know that doesn't seem like a big deal, but it is, when you consider that those vets have a huge impact on the development of high-end prospects playing in the A. There's a ton at stake for guys who aren't on the billboards.

gravey9 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:22 AM
  #20
Riche16
Pessimistic-Realist
 
Riche16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,460
vCash: 500
Anyone that doesn't think this league is completely malfunctioning as a whole, is fooling themselves. The owners are certainly to blame for that. They are also, as owners, COMPLETELY within their rights to try to fix it in any way they see fit. As long as they don't do it during the tenure of a current CBA.

Riche16 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:22 AM
  #21
gravey9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ltrangerfan View Post
As I said, when I paid $1000 for hockey tix to MSG how much indirectly went to the players? $570?
DUDE, it's not 60% of profits. It's 60% of Hockey Related Revenue. There is a lot of other revenue that comes in that is NOT deemed as HRR. So, that number is misleading.

gravey9 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:30 AM
  #22
Brian Boyle
portnor, pls
 
Brian Boyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,046
vCash: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by gravey9 View Post
Actually, BEFORE the lockout of 04-05 the players earned 74% of hockey related revenue. So, yes, the players made major concessions - much of which they got back because of growth over the years.

That said, players on an individual basis, did not necessarily make more than they made 7 years ago. For instance, Bobby Holik, a 3rd line center, had just signed a deal with the Rangers that would have paid him 9 million annually. Nowadays, the younger versions of Holik, a guy like Brandon Dubinsky who is either a 3rd line C or a 2nd line right wing gets paid $4 a year and he's constant trade bait because $4 mil is too much for a 3rd line center under the salary cap. So, half the money, and much less job security. So, going to a cap and the roll back have had a major impact on half the leagues' individual players.
Holik wasn't a 3rd line center when he signed with the Rangers.

And it's not really fair a solid comparison--Holik vs. Dubinsky. Dubinsky's contract covers two years of RFA years and two years of UFA years. Holik was a UFA signing back when the age was 31, and there was less UFAs on the market. Also I can't think of a similar contract given to a player like Holik in those days, so the contract was really an outlier.

Brian Boyle is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:36 AM
  #23
ltrangerfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gravey9 View Post
DUDE, it's not 60% of profits. It's 60% of Hockey Related Revenue. There is a lot of other revenue that comes in that is NOT deemed as HRR. So, that number is misleading.
So gate receipts aren't sold tickets = hockey related revenues?

Help. Now I'm confused.



WHAT IS HOCKEY RELATED REVENUE?

The precise definition of HRR comes from the current collective bargaining agreement, a copy of which is available in PDF form here. Specifically, you can turn to Article 50 (page 160 of 475) for the section on HRR. That section is around 25 pages long and full of lawyer-ese, so I’m going to try (in my non-legal interpretation) to offer a condensed version for your review.

For the purposes of a definition, let’s go with revenue “…relating to or deriving from, relating to or arising directly or indirectly out of the playing of NHL hockey games or NHL-related events in which current NHL Players participate or in which current NHL Players’ names and likenesses are used…” There’s more nuance than that which I’m presenting, but this is the heart of the matter – money from NHL-related games and events that capitalize on the players involvement.

The expired CBA also gives us a “non-exhaustive” list of items that are contemplated in HRR:

1. NHL regular season and gate receipts

2. Pre-season games

3. Special games

4. NHL national, international and national digital broadcasts

5. NHL Networks

6. Local cable television broadcasts

7. Local over-the-air television broadcasts

8. Local pay-per-view, satellite and other broadcasts

9. Local radio broadcasts

10. Club internet

11. Publications

12. In-arena novelty sales

13. Non-arena novelty sales

14. Concessions

15. Luxury boxes/suites

16. Club/premium seats

17. Fixed signage and arena sponsorships

18. Temporary signage and club sponsorships

19. Dasher boards

20. Parking

21. Other events – What seems to be a catch-all for events that fit the spirit of the definition but aren’t specifically itemized above

ltrangerfan is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:37 AM
  #24
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,029
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by -31- View Post
Holik wasn't a 3rd line center when he signed with the Rangers.

And it's not really fair a solid comparison--Holik vs. Dubinsky. Dubinsky's contract covers two years of RFA years and two years of UFA years. Holik was a UFA signing back when the age was 31, and there was less UFAs on the market. Also I can't think of a similar contract given to a player like Holik in those days, so the contract was really an outlier.
Holiks numbers werent all that off from Dubis.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/teams/players/bio/?id=215

50-60 pt player

Dubi had 50 last season, the year before he was a mid 50's player if you do points per game (he missed a lot of time).

major difference being Holik played in the clutch and grab era, not sure how to normalize for that.

Inferno is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:46 AM
  #25
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,012
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mooskating View Post
the billion dollar question... where did those profits go?
Their pockets.

True Blue is offline  
Closed Thread

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 03:53 AM.

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.