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.

NHLPA starts another 'disclaimer' vote

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-04-2013, 03:25 AM
  #101
Scheme
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
Your not a party ( neither am I) so our opinion is moot but it was pretty clear that the players were not going to accept the reversal. Not then, not now.

If the owners want to go to 50/50 on total revenues, I'm sure the pa signs.
PA have never fully agreed on 50-50 across the board. An eventual 50-50, or 50-50 with tricks to make it actually not 50. Even the make whole unbalances the whole thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
The pa is trying to get what they can. Cap and rollback last time, reduction in HRR contract length and variance
Last negotiation there was more of a systemic change (the cap) so I understand them fighting. But this time? It defies logic when the issues are that small. Also, rollback was proposed by the PA.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
It is true the players dont assume risk but they are employees not partners. I like Geoff Molson, but I'm not paying 75 bucks to see him do his job.
Really? Then why do the PA insist they are not employees but are the product? And they sure don't want to be treated like employees but as partners.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
Until the owners stop viewing the PA as an ATM, at the end of every CBA poorly run teams or teams in crappy markets will cry poor and this whole process starts again.
Hmm, haven't heard the ATM analogy yet, but this is really just more hyperbole. You yourself said none of us are in the room but you assume the owners view the players as such? That's a pretty serious accusation and you should back that up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
If your assumption that 50/50 is equitable, when the owners ask 60/40 you gonna change your tune? Casuse its gonna happen.
Right, and let me borrow your crystal ball for next week's lottery numbers.

Scheme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 05:33 AM
  #102
McLlwain
Trevor Forever
 
McLlwain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Cologne/Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 916
vCash: 500
So, we're back in kindergarten again?

The PA starts another disclaimer vote. And the league answers with a "You know, we're really, really serious about that January 19th deadline. Like REALLY serious!"

Deal in days or it's over: source
Quote:
A veteran member of the NHLís board of governors says commissioner Gary Bettman is prepared to cancel the season on Thursday if a deal has not been reached or appears to be imminent.

The chill that has settled on NHL labour negotiations is all part of a Don Fehr plan to push commissioner Bettman into a corner for one last squeeze and there could be unfortunate circumstances for hockey fans, said the governor who requested anonymity.

The league believes Fehr is unwilling to do a deal until after Bettman has cancelled the NHL season and the union leader is now slowing the process one last time to increase pressure on the commissioner, said the governor late Thursday night.
The league got put in an uncomfortable position once the news leaked, that a significant number of owners told Bettman, that cancelling the season is not an option. Of course Fehr will try to squeeze every little bit out of the owners till the last possible moment. That's what he's hired for. How the hell can the league be surprised, that he re-installs the one big threat the union has available?

Actually, this made me wonder how hard of a deadline January 19th really is. It has been stressed to a point where it starts to sound like a cry of desperation more than anything else. Everyone and their mother knows about this deadline. Why do they emphasise it at this point again?

Both parties are well aware of the damage they cause if this season gets cancelled. It's not going to happen. So this is either the last push of posturing from both sides before an agreement next Thursday, or we might see Bettman eventually push the potential start of the season beyond January 19th, if only to gain a little more time to finalise things.

McLlwain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 07:06 AM
  #103
optimus2861
Registered User
 
optimus2861's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bedford NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,674
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wingsfan2965 View Post
If it does see court, they're going to get absolutely steamrolled. As I said before, I honestly think Bettman's daring them to do it.
Bettman's calling their bluff. If they're serious about doing it, they need to do it already, understanding that it will blow the whole league to kingdom come and absolutely nobody knows what emerges from the other side of the legal process. If they're not serious about doing it, then sit down at the table, shut up about the bogus disclaimer, and let's get this deal done.

I'm at the point now where I almost want the players to do this. If the players genuinely hate Bettman & the owners & the league this much that they just can't sign a deal and just can't stand being in the room with them, then do they even want to play in this league any more? Just nuke the whole freaking thing already & be done with it!

optimus2861 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 07:19 AM
  #104
mnwildfan79
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 625
vCash: 500
It absolutely baffles me how many posters are so certain that the NHLPA has no chance in the upcoming legal battle if they go through with this and go the anti-trust route. How are people coming to this conclusion?

mnwildfan79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 07:24 AM
  #105
Shrimper
Trick or ruddy treat
 
Shrimper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Essex
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 69,484
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by mnwildfan79 View Post
It absolutely baffles me how many posters are so certain that the NHLPA has no chance in the upcoming legal battle if they go through with this and go the anti-trust route. How are people coming to this conclusion?
Because they acted liked children.

I ask you this. Why, all of a sudden does it take only 48 hours to vote but last time it took a week? Fehr/PA were using as a stalling tactic and everything they do just makes things worse. That type of negotiating won't sit well in any court.

Do you seen any comments about the players from the owners about how they're treated? No. Because they sensible whilst the players whine on twitter about how they're "harshly treated" but would be glad to go back in an instant to play hockey once a deal is done.

Shrimper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 07:27 AM
  #106
Steve
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Guelph, Ontario, Can
Posts: 1,266
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mnwildfan79 View Post
It absolutely baffles me how many posters are so certain that the NHLPA has no chance in the upcoming legal battle if they go through with this and go the anti-trust route. How are people coming to this conclusion?
I don't understand it either, do I think the PA is playing this to its advantage? FOR SURE! Does that mean they don't want a deal? Not at all. This is supposed to be a last resort, by not filing and now going back a second time can surely show the PA is trying (you can debate this) everything it can to get a "fair" deal done. If it can't this time and the season is lost, then perhaps the union really does feel their is no need for a PA.

NHL etc.. say they don't care about the DOI, even if they feel their case is extremely strong, they would be insane to "not care" on the off chance they have miscalculated.

Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 07:42 AM
  #107
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheme View Post
PA have never fully agreed on 50-50 across the board. An eventual 50-50, or 50-50 with tricks to make it actually not 50. Even the make whole unbalances the whole thing.



Last negotiation there was more of a systemic change (the cap) so I understand them fighting. But this time? It defies logic when the issues are that small. Also, rollback was proposed by the PA.



Really? Then why do the PA insist they are not employees but are the product? And they sure don't want to be treated like employees but as partners.



Hmm, haven't heard the ATM analogy yet, but this is really just more hyperbole. You yourself said none of us are in the room but you assume the owners view the players as such? That's a pretty serious accusation and you should back that up.



Right, and let me borrow your crystal ball for next week's lottery numbers.

So 50/50 is somehow magically fair? I said half of revenues, not half of HRR ( I.e the owners don't get to take deductions out of the pot) I suspect the players sign this.

The pa proposed a one time 5% rollback, they took 24% and that's winning?

The players claim they are both employees and the product because they are. The NHL, which grew last year, would not do so well with ahl level players. Some of the weak sisters have a hard time now, getting rid of the primary appeal " worlds best hockey league" and the league takes a huge hit.


The ATM idea is based on the owners actions. The owners, whose gm's devised these cap-skirting contracts in order to gain selective advantage over other teams, scramble to sign players to these deals then decry that they can't live under these terms. Their answer, ask the players to agree to concessions as a hedge for their own irresponsibility. Because if it works out, they look great, if if doesn't they cry poor and ask the players to bail them out retrospectively. If the players balk, the cry poor owners lock the players out. The owners don't care about the health of the league, they will do anything they can to gain an advantage because it is clear that there are literally no consequences as they think they can always make it back up off the players backs.

I don't know what will happen if the pa decertified, I'm thinking that both sides think they know what will happen. I am sure that they both have tons of lawyers advising them. I would prefer that the sides came to some agreement because both sides will know the consequences. If it goes to decertification and, as some have suggested all players become Ufa's, who knows how that pans out?

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 07:55 AM
  #108
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,298
vCash: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wingsfan2965 View Post
It'll be interesting to see if more people vote no this time, and how many more do.
I think it's going to be more unanimous in favor of DOI

The players (in good faith) held off on moving forward with the DOI when they had the chance and the NHL blew the opportunity to work towards getting a deal done.

I would expect that the 22 that voted no last time are cut in half at teh very least.

pld459666 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 07:56 AM
  #109
BLONG7
Registered User
 
BLONG7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 12,394
vCash: 500
The PA would be insane to decertify...insane...Ted Lindsay would hunt down Fehr and shoot him...

Half a years wages lost, and he is ready to make it a full years wages lost...real bright...

BLONG7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 07:57 AM
  #110
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,412
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
The players (in good faith) held off on moving forward with the DOI when they had the chance and the NHL blew the opportunity to work towards getting a deal done.
No, it was Don Fehr who held off on moving forward. Players apparently want Fehr to say he doesn't want to represent the union.

It's really funny if you think about it.

Pepper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 07:59 AM
  #111
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,412
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
So 50/50 is somehow magically fair? I said half of revenues, not half of HRR ( I.e the owners don't get to take deductions out of the pot) I suspect the players sign this.
What deductions you think owners shouldn't get to take out of the pot? Concrete examples please.

Pepper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 08:01 AM
  #112
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,298
vCash: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
The league hardlining or the PA not liking what was proposed does not translate into unfair labor negotiation. The PA would have to prove the NHL is unwilling to negotiate in good faith. Considering they allowed the original DOI to expire because they received a more favorable offer. Proving in court this second attempt is nothing more than a ploy to strong arm the NHL becomes increasingly difficult. Combine that with those always lovable tweets and the PA does not look at that genuine.
That's why this is a DOI and NOT decertifying.

Similar, but still very very different.

pld459666 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 08:04 AM
  #113
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,298
vCash: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
No, it was Don Fehr who held off on moving forward. Players apparently want Fehr to say he doesn't want to represent the union.

It's really funny if you think about it.
I forget i have to seperate the two.

pld459666 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 08:04 AM
  #114
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,298
vCash: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLONG7 View Post
The PA would be insane to decertify...insane...Ted Lindsay would hunt down Fehr and shoot him...

Half a years wages lost, and he is ready to make it a full years wages lost...real bright...
they are not decertifying.

pld459666 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 08:07 AM
  #115
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLONG7 View Post
The PA would be insane to decertify...insane...Ted Lindsay would hunt down Fehr and shoot him...

Half a years wages lost, and he is ready to make it a full years wages lost...real bright...
They are adults, they get to make their own decisions. If they follow Fehr and get a great deal, the owners have to live with it. If they follow fear and it blows up in their faces, the players are going to eat it. That's not insane. The last doi vote says fear seems to have an overwhelming amount of support, that people he does not represent think he's screwing the players likely means very little to him.

And let's be frank, if these same debates were going on while the games were being played, no one gives a crap about how much players are losing or potentially losing. Fans don't care what the players make, they want the games back even if it means the players sign a poison deal.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 08:14 AM
  #116
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
What deductions you think owners shouldn't get to take out of the pot? Concrete examples please.
I'm just saying that there are lots of people who think 50/50 is somehow magically equitable. But the owners are proposing 50/50 of HRR, which is not the same. The definition of HRR was initially in question, then settled, then in question then settled and now in question again.

If you want an example, if the players are expected to clean up the mess the Owens made with the weak sister teams, then why don't they get a cut of expansion fees? Even with the potential for possible future expansion, I dont think this is what is up for debate, but it seems that the players and owners do not have a fixed definition of what HRR is.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 08:15 AM
  #117
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,298
vCash: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrimper View Post
Because they acted liked children.

I ask you this. Why, all of a sudden does it take only 48 hours to vote but last time it took a week? Fehr/PA were using as a stalling tactic and everything they do just makes things worse. That type of negotiating won't sit well in any court.

Do you seen any comments about the players from the owners about how they're treated? No. Because they sensible whilst the players whine on twitter about how they're "harshly treated" but would be glad to go back in an instant to play hockey once a deal is done.
You don't see it becuase the owners have been silenced by Bettman to the tune of MASSIVE fines should they say anything.

Just ask the folks in Detroit.

I wonder what we would be hearing should Bettman lift the public speaking ban on the owners.

It would be interesting indeed.

pld459666 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 08:23 AM
  #118
moosehead81
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Great White North
Country: Canada
Posts: 841
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McLlwain View Post
So, we're back in kindergarten again?

The PA starts another disclaimer vote. And the league answers with a "You know, we're really, really serious about that January 19th deadline. Like REALLY serious!"

Deal in days or it's over: source


The league got put in an uncomfortable position once the news leaked, that a significant number of owners told Bettman, that cancelling the season is not an option. Of course Fehr will try to squeeze every little bit out of the owners till the last possible moment. That's what he's hired for. How the hell can the league be surprised, that he re-installs the one big threat the union has available?

Actually, this made me wonder how hard of a deadline January 19th really is. It has been stressed to a point where it starts to sound like a cry of desperation more than anything else. Everyone and their mother knows about this deadline. Why do they emphasise it at this point again?

Both parties are well aware of the damage they cause if this season gets cancelled. It's not going to happen. So this is either the last push of posturing from both sides before an agreement next Thursday, or we might see Bettman eventually push the potential start of the season beyond January 19th, if only to gain a little more time to finalise things.
Gary Lawless, a spokesman for the owners' if ever there was one, hockey writer for the smallest newest market in the league, gets a bit of a scoop via an owner reiterating Bettman's resolve in cancelling the season if there's no deal by next Thursday. This after Napoleon's attitude and negotiating became a little more hard boiled when Fehr and his guys decided to not file the DOI on Wednesday night. Now the PA's doing another vote to re-institute their ability to file and the owners, via Gary Lawless, fire a shot across the bow. Why am I not surprised?

This is so typical of how this has gone- Bettman and his cronies willing to risk everything (markets, fans, sponsors, the very existence of the league itself) almost as a matter of principle and a leader of the PA who doesn't give a **** except to try and get the best deal he can for his players. Lawless went on to say that, according to his source, if the season is cancelled, "Bettman will then take off what is currently on the table" and "a 50-50 share will no longer be offered and the league will pursue a much revamped package". Also, "there will also be the messiness of lawsuits, a dissolved union and complete uncertainty for both sides to deal with. Some owners, said the governor .... would welcome such an opportunity if the current deal cannot be closed."

Now I'm no rocket scientist, but it would seem to me that if one is really really interested in having this league play this year, or in any year in its present form, one would not go around inflaming the other side with these continual threats, particularly given the sensitivity of the current "negotiations". I'm of the opinion there'll be no NHL hockey this season and quite possibly into 2013-14 quite frankly because neither side wants to resolve this. The apparent enmity between the sides is astounding, given that they're supposed to be "professionals".

moosehead81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 08:25 AM
  #119
jumptheshark
the burn out
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 53,009
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadianPirate View Post
Apparently the reason for the pa doing this might be because of the NHL returning to a hard line stance.

Eric Macramalla ‏@EricOnSportsLaw
I warned here yesterday that once disclaimer deadline passed NHL might revert back to less favourable terms - may be happening
The twitter guy has things reversed--the NHL went back to their original positions lare wednesday and that set off the events on thursday that lead to the second disclaimer vote.

Right now it is looking like the NHLPA will blow up all the previous CBAs and start from square one-- the part that should scare some people is, that according the lawyers with law degrees and not the talking heads who just pretend to know eveything. That the nhlpa could be purtting in motion the pieces of the puzzle to make all NHLPA members UFA affective right away.

that is where the fun begins

__________________
not sure how--but the fish just jumped in the boat and put the hook in it's mouth
52299/14814
The twenty year rebuild is on!!! Embrace the suck
jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 08:31 AM
  #120
sandysan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jumptheshark View Post
The twitter guy has things reversed--the NHL went back to their original positions lare wednesday and that set off the events on thursday that lead to the second disclaimer vote.

Right now it is looking like the NHLPA will blow up all the previous CBAs and start from square one-- the part that should scare some people is, that according the lawyers with law degrees and not the talking heads who just pretend to know eveything. That the nhlpa could be purtting in motion the pieces of the puzzle to make all NHLPA members UFA affective right away.

that is where the fun begins
I also think that is the crazy part. I heard that draft picks also come into play. With no cap and no strings on players, it will be insane. The top players will make out like bandits, the middle plus/minus and the bottom will get screwed as it will certainly emperil teams and I suspect that several team will fold along with their roster spots so they will end up in the kohl or pumping gas.

sandysan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 08:32 AM
  #121
Razor29
52-22-8
 
Razor29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,430
vCash: 50
Fool me once...

Razor29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 08:43 AM
  #122
Frenzy1
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 3,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by colchar View Post
Because he has issued one too many ultimatums and has refused to negotiate. Saying "here is our offer, take it or leave it" is not negotiating - it is making demands. When the federal mediators were last there it was reported that they hardly spent any time with the league because the league's answer to everything was "here is our offer, take it or leave it." I simply do not understand how anyone can think that that ******* Bettman has been negotiating or has been doing so in good faith.
I don't think I could disagree with you more. The NHL has increased the legnth of contracts (5 years to 6), given players almost 50% of the make whole money (they initially weren't going do to any).

To say they have not made an concessions is just flat out wrong.

Frenzy1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 08:45 AM
  #123
Crease
Registered User
 
Crease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,833
vCash: 500
It would be stupid not to revote. One week to go. Having the ability to file a DOI on a moment's notice certainly doesn't hurt the NHLPA at the negotiating table.

Crease is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 08:48 AM
  #124
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,412
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
I'm just saying that there are lots of people who think 50/50 is somehow magically equitable. But the owners are proposing 50/50 of HRR, which is not the same. The definition of HRR was initially in question, then settled, then in question then settled and now in question again.
I don't understand what you're trying to say here. HRR definitions have been agreed to a long time ago, basicly it's the same it was in the last CBA. PA had the chance to go through the numbers in the summer and the only issue they raised was expansion fees. HRR definitions are not in question at the moment (and haven't been in some time).

So concrete examples please.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sandysan View Post
If you want an example, if the players are expected to clean up the mess the Owens made with the weak sister teams, then why don't they get a cut of expansion fees? Even with the potential for possible future expansion, I dont think this is what is up for debate, but it seems that the players and owners do not have a fixed definition of what HRR is.
What? Who is Owens? What mess is the players expected to clean up?

In the case of expansion, players get their cut. They get 23 new jobs per expansion team.

Why on earth should they get 50% of the expansion fee? It's not revenue.

Should the owners get 50% of the personal sponsorshipdeals players sign? That would be only fair since it's hockey related revenue players are currently getting but not sharing any of it with owners.

Pepper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 08:54 AM
  #125
Erik Estrada
One Country United!
 
Erik Estrada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Land of the Habs
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,777
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McLlwain View Post
So, we're back in kindergarten again?

The PA starts another disclaimer vote. And the league answers with a "You know, we're really, really serious about that January 19th deadline. Like REALLY serious!"

Deal in days or it's over: source


.
This is an interesting article. It's well-sourced... a veteran member of the NHL Board of Governors. There's a hard news element to it... Bettman is allegedly moving up by one day the date where he would pull the plug on the season (from next Friday to Thursday).

Then there's some claims and threats...

1- On the date of possible cancellation next Thursday, Bettman "will then take off what is currently on the table", "a 50-50 share will no longer be offered", and there will be "a much revamped package".

2- Fehr would be "slowing the process one last time to increase pressure". Elsewhere it writes Fehr is "trying to blow up the process" and "is no longer interested in making a deal". And finally Fehr "will then let things sit for a day or two (after the cancellation date) before trying to leverage Bettman one more time into signing a deal viewed as better for the players".

3- After cancellation, there will be "lawsuits, a dissolved union" and talks between Fehr and Bettman "on the basis of doing a deal for the 2013-14 season".

Erik Estrada 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 09:44 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.