HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
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.

Quebec City Part VII: Si J'avais les ailes d'un ange

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-27-2013, 06:56 PM
  #551
Undertakerqc
Registered User
 
Undertakerqc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post

F. No more than two of those three venues and in all likelihood only ONE of those venues will be north of the 49th parallel.

G. That means a MINIMUM of ONE of those venues is going to be a US city. Whether you guys like it or not there will be NO net-loss of US cities in the NHL. Get used to it guys: You aren't going to get an all-Canada hockey league or even a league where a bare majority of teams are Canadian. You can get all emotional about it until you're blue in face but those are the cold hard facts that you're going to have to live with.
LOL!!! Who's asking for an all Canadian league. This is an emotional and irrational argument. LOL!! The league once had 8 Canadian Franchise, so the NHl is not worried losing a couple weak team from the US and adding 2 strong Canadian one. Plus with expansion they will get 1 US team, maybe two, depending how things work out with the Toronto arena.

Undertakerqc is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 06:59 PM
  #552
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patofqc View Post
LOL!!! Who's asking for an all Canadian league. This is an emotional and irrational argument. LOL!! The league once had 8 Canadian Franchise, so the NHl is not worried losing a couple weak team from the US and adding 2 strong Canadian one. Plus with expansion they will get 1 US team, maybe two, depending how things work out with the Toronto arena.
Hardly irrational or emotional: It's a direct response to statements made on this very board. Use the search function: You'll find a number of posters calling for the dissolution of the NHL and the formation of an all-Canada league. And THAT is what's irrational and emotional.

SaintPatrick33 is online now  
Old
01-27-2013, 07:09 PM
  #553
powerstuck
User Registered
 
powerstuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Quebec City
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,350
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
My position is coldly rational: A competitive team will do better than a loser in a fresh market. In a market like Quebec you could have the worst team in the history of the universe and it will still sell out. That's the cold hard facts.

Here's a little dose of reality:

A. There will NOT be a mass exodus of teams from the US to Canada. No matter how much certain Canadian fans carp for it.

B. There isn't going to be contraction of US markets. Forget it folks: That's bush league.

C. In all likelihood the league will expand by two teams.

D. Right now there is only ONE US franchise that is likely to relocate: Phoenix.

E. Given the above, that means there are three cities that will be needed to host those teams.

F. No more than two of those three venues and in all likelihood only ONE of those venues will be north of the 49th parallel.

G. That means a MINIMUM of ONE of those venues is going to be a US city. Whether you guys like it or not there will be NO net-loss of US cities in the NHL. Get used to it guys: You aren't going to get an all-Canada hockey league or even a league where a bare majority of teams are Canadian. You can get all emotional about it until you're blue in face but those are the cold hard facts that you're going to have to live with.
Fine. Let's imagine the following scenario. Coyotes move to Seattle. Two years later...

NHL decides to expand by two teams.

There are two markets who want and can get an NHL team : Quebec and Southern Ontario.

How do you explain the fact that the NHL would...

a) Expand by two in Canada
b) Expand only in Canada
c) Expand by two teams in EAST

If you are unable to justify any of the above 3...please see my knee-jerk emotional response a page and half behind this post.

powerstuck is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 07:15 PM
  #554
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerstuck View Post
a) Expand by two in Canada
Unlikely to happen as the Maple Leafs would in all likelihood oppose any expansion onto their turf. Bottom-line: The Leafs will block it. Apart from Quebec there are no other cities of suitable size in Canada.


Quote:
Originally Posted by powerstuck View Post
b) Expand only in Canada
See above: Not happening.


Quote:
Originally Posted by powerstuck View Post
c) Expand by two teams in EAST
Given that realignment is imminent why would expanding by two teams in the east be an issue? Not sure why this is even on your radar.


Last edited by SaintPatrick33: 01-27-2013 at 09:23 PM.
SaintPatrick33 is online now  
Old
01-27-2013, 07:23 PM
  #555
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerstuck View Post
Fine. Let's imagine the following scenario. Coyotes move to Seattle. Two years later...

NHL decides to expand by two teams.

There are two markets who want and can get an NHL team : Quebec and Southern Ontario.

How do you explain the fact that the NHL would...

a) Expand by two in Canada
b) Expand only in Canada
c) Expand by two teams in EAST

If you are unable to justify any of the above 3...please see my knee-jerk emotional response a page and half behind this post.
And btw, I don't personally oppose expansion in Canada. I'm simply pointing out the business realities. I fully back a team in Quebec. I was appalled when the Nordiques left in the first place. Appalled yes, but I understood the reasons why it happened. Would I like to see a second team in Toronto (best bet in Hamilton)? Damn tootin' I would, if for no other reason than it would light a fire under the Leafs' azz and force them to get their act together. Do I think the Leafs would ever be willing to give up their monopoly over the GTA? Nope. In a perfect world they would but we don't live in a perfect world and I don't see it happening. Would I like to see a team in Saskatoon or Regina? Absolutely. But I also understand that both are too damn small right now and have some growing to do before it happens.

SaintPatrick33 is online now  
Old
01-27-2013, 09:11 PM
  #556
No Fun Shogun
Global Moderator
34-38-61-10-13
 
No Fun Shogun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Chicagoland, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 24,580
vCash: 262
Yeah, despite what some GTAers and Hamiltonians may desperately want to believe, they're actually not likely the frontrunners to get teams due to Leafs (and Sabres) opposition likely being more than enough to pull votes in the BoG away from them and towards other places, too. Also, doesn't help that Markham's arena looks near dead and Copps needs a lot of refurbishment.

Quebec City, Seattle, Houston, and Portland. Take your pick, three of those four are likely going to be the next landing spots if a team relocates and the NHL expands by two, and Houston will only happen if there's an expansion while Portland will only happen if Paul Allen's involved..

No Fun Shogun is online now  
Old
01-27-2013, 11:18 PM
  #557
CHRDANHUTCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auburn, Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 14,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via MSN to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via Yahoo to CHRDANHUTCH
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Fun Shogun View Post
Yeah, despite what some GTAers and Hamiltonians may desperately want to believe, they're actually not likely the frontrunners to get teams due to Leafs (and Sabres) opposition likely being more than enough to pull votes in the BoG away from them and towards other places, too. Also, doesn't help that Markham's arena looks near dead and Copps needs a lot of refurbishment.

Quebec City, Seattle, Houston, and Portland. Take your pick, three of those four are likely going to be the next landing spots if a team relocates and the NHL expands by two, and Houston will only happen if there's an expansion while Portland will only happen if Paul Allen's involved..
care to explain how you conclude Phoenix is relocating, NFS, WHEN YOU ALSO state tht Seattle doesn't need hockey if Hansen gets the Kings, TO BECOME The new Sonics, what if Jamison's approved the same way Hansen is approved, and remember Levin, his quote is there's no existing franchises available to be relocated, if that's true, then QC, SEA, HOU, and POR, are a moot point, if the NHL also elects to stabilize its existing markets before expansion....

as for QC, I've said all along that they should follow TNSE's lead in getting a new venue, but that's where it ends, they have a successful junior franchise, because you saw how the Habs/Nordiques rivalry killed any chances of a pro team in QC.

CHRDANHUTCH is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 11:21 PM
  #558
Undertakerqc
Registered User
 
Undertakerqc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH View Post
care to explain how you conclude Phoenix is relocating, NFS, WHEN YOU ALSO state tht Seattle doesn't need hockey if Hansen gets the Kings, TO BECOME The new Sonics, what if Jamison's approved the same way Hansen is approved, and remember Levin, his quote is there's no existing franchises available to be relocated, if that's true, then QC, SEA, HOU, and POR, are a moot point, if the NHL also elects to stabilize its existing markets before expansion....

as for QC, I've said all along that they should follow TNSE's lead in getting a new venue, but that's where it ends, they have a successful junior franchise, because you saw how the Habs/Nordiques rivalry killed any chances of a pro team in QC.
I dont get what your saying...

Undertakerqc is offline  
Old
01-27-2013, 11:26 PM
  #559
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH View Post
as for QC, I've said all along that they should follow TNSE's lead in getting a new venue, but that's where it ends, they have a successful junior franchise, because you saw how the Habs/Nordiques rivalry killed any chances of a pro team in QC.
It wasn't the rivalry with the Habs that caused the Nordiques to relocate and it's not preventing the Nordiques return. The Habs have no say in the matter as Quebec City isn't within Montreal's exclusive territory.

SaintPatrick33 is online now  
Old
01-27-2013, 11:46 PM
  #560
CHRDANHUTCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auburn, Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 14,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via MSN to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via Yahoo to CHRDANHUTCH
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
It wasn't the rivalry with the Habs that caused the Nordiques to relocate and it's not preventing the Nordiques return. The Habs have no say in the matter as Quebec City isn't within Montreal's exclusive territory.
THEN WHY Did Quebec fans reject the Citadelles, if there wasn't an inherit rivalry w/ Montreal, Quebec fans lost their Nordiques, due to the Colisee, but lost any sympathy w/ hockey fans when the Citadelles became the Hamilton Bulldogs, in 2003 after Edmonton left, SaintPatrick33, why is a Canadiens affiliate in Ontario, not QC.

THT'S why Patrick Roy never forgave the Canadiens, after walking away from Corey, AND was summarily dealt to the Avalanche.

CHRDANHUTCH is offline  
Old
01-28-2013, 12:01 AM
  #561
Undertakerqc
Registered User
 
Undertakerqc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH View Post
THEN WHY Did Quebec fans reject the Citadelles, if there wasn't an inherit rivalry w/ Montreal, Quebec fans lost their Nordiques, due to the Colisee, but lost any sympathy w/ hockey fans when the Citadelles became the Hamilton Bulldogs, in 2003 after Edmonton left, SaintPatrick33, why is a Canadiens affiliate in Ontario, not QC.

THT'S why Patrick Roy never forgave the Canadiens, after walking away from Corey, AND was summarily dealt to the Avalanche.
What are you drinking at this late hour? Must be strong!! AHL is hard to like has you lose your best players during the season, hence why people are going to the junior games, with a passion, cause you get to keep your best players (unless its a lockout year). They are drawing 13000 plus a game for junior hockey. It has nothing to do with the rivalry, it has to do with the product. BTW the Habs affiliate is soon to be relocated to Laval, Qc where they will build a brand new 9000 place arena.

Undertakerqc is offline  
Old
01-28-2013, 12:05 AM
  #562
CHRDANHUTCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auburn, Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 14,853
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via MSN to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via Yahoo to CHRDANHUTCH
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patofqc View Post
What are you drinking at this late hour? Must be strong!! AHL is hard to like has you lose your best players during the season, hence why people are going to the junior games, with a passion, cause you get to keep your best players (unless its a lockout year). They are drawing 13000 plus a game for junior hockey. It has nothing to do with the rivalry, it has to do with the product. BTW the Habs affiliate is soon to be relocated to Laval, Qc where they will build a brand new 9000 place arena.
that makes me even less sympathetic to a QC Franchise, Pat, that arrogant attitude, if the arena hadn't been already passed, you should be stuck w/ a 70 yr old Colisee, just as Aubut did in 1996.

CHRDANHUTCH is offline  
Old
01-28-2013, 12:07 AM
  #563
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH View Post
THEN WHY Did Quebec fans reject the Citadelles, if there wasn't an inherit rivalry w/ Montreal, Quebec fans lost their Nordiques, due to the Colisee, but lost any sympathy w/ hockey fans when the Citadelles became the Hamilton Bulldogs, in 2003 after Edmonton left, SaintPatrick33, why is a Canadiens affiliate in Ontario, not QC.

THT'S why Patrick Roy never forgave the Canadiens, after walking away from Corey, AND was summarily dealt to the Avalanche.
^^^^^ That post made absolutely no sense logically or grammatically. The Nordiques left originally because the Canadian dollar (which is what the franchise's revenue was in) tanked while at the same time they had to pay out salaries in US dollars. A city as small as Quebec couldn't support a major sports franchise under those economic circumstances. It had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the Habs rivalry.

And while Patrick Roy is from Quebec City, he has nothing to do with the Nordiques relocation and his issues with Mario Tremblay had nothing to do with the Nordiques relocation either. I have absolutely no idea why you even brought up Casseau.

SaintPatrick33 is online now  
Old
01-28-2013, 12:09 AM
  #564
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patofqc View Post
What are you drinking at this late hour? Must be strong!! AHL is hard to like has you lose your best players during the season, hence why people are going to the junior games, with a passion, cause you get to keep your best players (unless its a lockout year). They are drawing 13000 plus a game for junior hockey. It has nothing to do with the rivalry, it has to do with the product. BTW the Habs affiliate is soon to be relocated to Laval, Qc where they will build a brand new 9000 place arena.
The Remparts draw well do they not?

SaintPatrick33 is online now  
Old
01-28-2013, 12:10 AM
  #565
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH View Post
that makes me even less sympathetic to a QC Franchise, Pat, that arrogant attitude, if the arena hadn't been already passed, you should be stuck w/ a 70 yr old Colisee, just as Aubut did in 1996.
WTH are you on about? Building a new arena to replace an aged fossil makes Quebec arrogant? WTF am I missing here?

SaintPatrick33 is online now  
Old
01-28-2013, 12:12 AM
  #566
Undertakerqc
Registered User
 
Undertakerqc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH View Post
that makes me even less sympathetic to a QC Franchise, Pat, that arrogant attitude, if the arena hadn't been already passed, you should be stuck w/ a 70 yr old Colisee, just as Aubut did in 1996.

I dont get what you are saying there either... what does Aubut have to do with a 70 year old arena? And i dont care if you are sympathetic to us or not, you and i wont decide if a team comes here or not.

Undertakerqc is offline  
Old
01-28-2013, 12:15 AM
  #567
jfb392
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,104
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patofqc View Post
What are you drinking at this late hour? Must be strong!! AHL is hard to like has you lose your best players during the season, hence why people are going to the junior games, with a passion, cause you get to keep your best players (unless its a lockout year). They are drawing 13000 plus a game for junior hockey. It has nothing to do with the rivalry, it has to do with the product. BTW the Habs affiliate is soon to be relocated to Laval, Qc where they will build a brand new 9000 place arena.
Nothing I'd guess, as that's just your standard Professor post (aka just stream of consciousness, basically).

Back before the Jets were back, he went on and on about how they couldn't possibly return because of the existence of the Manitoba Moose.

jfb392 is offline  
Old
01-28-2013, 12:17 AM
  #568
Undertakerqc
Registered User
 
Undertakerqc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
^^^^^ That post made absolutely no sense logically or grammatically. The Nordiques left originally because the Canadian dollar (which is what the franchise's revenue was in) tanked while at the same time they had to pay out salaries in US dollars. A city as small as Quebec couldn't support a major sports franchise under those economic circumstances. It had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the Habs rivalry.

And while Patrick Roy is from Quebec City, he has nothing to do with the Nordiques relocation and his issues with Mario Tremblay had nothing to do with the Nordiques relocation either. I have absolutely no idea why you even brought up Casseau.
Exactly the Nordiques left because their was a 60 cent Canadian dollar compared to the US. There was no prospect of a salary cap in the near future, no revenu sharing. And there was no prospect of a new Arena cause our mayor at the time hated anything that had to do with sports, especially pro sport.

Now all of the above have drasticly improved.

Undertakerqc is offline  
Old
01-28-2013, 12:17 AM
  #569
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfb392 View Post
Nothing I'd guess, as that's just your standard Professor post (aka just stream of consciousness, basically).

Back before the Jets were back, he went on and on about how they couldn't possibly return because of the existence of the Manitoba Moose.
Dare I ask? I'm not sure what the Moose would have had to do with keeping the Jets from returning

SaintPatrick33 is online now  
Old
01-28-2013, 12:20 AM
  #570
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patofqc View Post
Exactly the Nordiques left because their was a 60 cent Canadian dollar compared to the US. There was no prospect of a salary cap in the near future, no revenu sharing. And there was no prospect of a new Arena cause our mayor at the time hated anything that had to do with sports, especially pro sport.

Now all of the above have drasticly improved.
Exactly. The circumstances have changed and the time is ripe for a Nordiques return. In a perfect world it would have been nice to see the Nordiques ride out the crash of the dollar. I understand we don't live in a perfect world but now that the worm has turned economically I see no reason why Quebec City shouldn't have their team back.

SaintPatrick33 is online now  
Old
01-28-2013, 12:26 AM
  #571
Undertakerqc
Registered User
 
Undertakerqc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Exactly. The circumstances have changed and the time is ripe for a Nordiques return. In a perfect world it would have been nice to see the Nordiques ride out the crash of the dollar. I understand we don't live in a perfect world but now that the worm has turned economically I see no reason why Quebec City shouldn't have their team back.
Both our City should have teams to be honest. Cause if one city gets a team before the other, the one left without a team will be pissed off.

Undertakerqc is offline  
Old
01-28-2013, 12:32 AM
  #572
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patofqc View Post
Both our City should have teams to be honest. Cause if one city gets a team before the other, the one left without a team will be pissed off.
Believe it or not I WAS appalled when the Nordiques left. The Habs-Nordiques rivalry produced some of the most classic games of the '80s (yes, I've been watching hockey that long lol). Peter Stastny was a marvel to watch.

Seattle SHOULD have gotten one the expansion franchises in the '70s but the ownership fell apart before the franchise could be awarded. It happens and there's no use crying over spilled milk. I'm actually from the other coast, the Washington DC area hence my fandom for the Caps, and what I've encountered out here over the past two years has been amazing: Hockey is MUCH bigger here than it is in the DC area.

SaintPatrick33 is online now  
Old
01-28-2013, 12:38 AM
  #573
jfb392
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,104
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Dare I ask? I'm not sure what the Moose would have had to do with keeping the Jets from returning
Well, he basically claimed that they had no arena to play in since the Moose were in the MTS Centre and since the AHL is so important, they'd never move the Moose franchise to enable them to have an NHL franchise (even though some kind of franchise movement happens in the AHL just about every season)..

jfb392 is offline  
Old
01-28-2013, 12:39 AM
  #574
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfb392 View Post
Well, he basically claimed that they had no arena to play in since the Moose were in the MTS Centre and since the AHL is so important, they'd never move the Moose franchise to enable them to have an NHL franchise (even though some kind of franchise movement happens in the AHL just about every season)..
That kind of leap of logic makes my head hurt

SaintPatrick33 is online now  
Old
01-28-2013, 12:45 AM
  #575
No Fun Shogun
Global Moderator
34-38-61-10-13
 
No Fun Shogun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Chicagoland, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 24,580
vCash: 262
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH View Post
care to explain how you conclude Phoenix is relocating, NFS, WHEN YOU ALSO state tht Seattle doesn't need hockey if Hansen gets the Kings, TO BECOME The new Sonics, what if Jamison's approved the same way Hansen is approved, and remember Levin, his quote is there's no existing franchises available to be relocated, if that's true, then QC, SEA, HOU, and POR, are a moot point, if the NHL also elects to stabilize its existing markets before expansion....

as for QC, I've said all along that they should follow TNSE's lead in getting a new venue, but that's where it ends, they have a successful junior franchise, because you saw how the Habs/Nordiques rivalry killed any chances of a pro team in QC.
First of all, re-read what I wrote. I said none of the things you said I said.

Second.... what? That's one of the most gibberish posts I've seen in a while..... until I read your later posts in this topic.

But, to try to decipher what you're saying.... Phoenix is definitely still on the relocation block, as Jamison's purchase hasn't been finalized in the least bit, the deadline for the sweetheart municipal funding deal is rapidly approaching, and nothing that's been said or shown has suggested that he has the financial backing to purchase the team. With all that mind, yes..... they can still be discussed as a relocation option. Beyond that, the Seattle example.... again, not sure if you even read my posts, as I never said that Seattle didn't need hockey with the Sonics coming back, I stated that two teams simultaneously expanding into a market, any market, probably isn't a wise idea for the obvious fact that the two together would assuredly cut into each other's initial excitement as disposable income is limited. Also, the points made about other teams not being up for sale is probably accurate, as the Yotes are the only team really up in the air, but the notion that the league would focus first on strengthening existing markets is only based on a well-intentioned hunch on your part. Finally, uh.... don't get your point about the Habs/Nords rivalry at all. That wouldn't prevent the Nordiques from coming back in any way.


Last edited by No Fun Shogun: 01-28-2013 at 12:54 AM.
No Fun Shogun is online now  
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 10:53 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.