HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

New Arena deal agreed to by city and Katz group:mod warning #616

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-09-2013, 04:00 PM
  #876
joestevens29
Registered User
 
joestevens29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,576
vCash: 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Funk View Post
There are 2 places bikes should not be allowed on sidewalks: Whyte Ave and Jasper Ave. There, I just saved us what looks like 98 million dollars.
Agree there.

joestevens29 is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 04:16 PM
  #877
raab
Where's the Hart?
 
raab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 7,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoneyGuy View Post
I agree with you.

But you missed my point.




Regarding moving the team, I really don't see that happening. The league must approve a move and like or hate Bettman, he won't let that happen.
Didn't Bettman already say he wouldn't try to stop a move if Katz and the City couldn't arrive at an agreement? And Seattle is a very realistic relocation opportunity for Katz. There's what like a 2 hour drive from Van to Seattle. Any investor who couldn't get a season seat or a skybox in Van would most likely buy one in Seattle. On top of that you have a much larger demographic compared to Northern Alberta, so you could potentially receive some pretty good tv money.

Either way no matter what happens this Arena debate has turned into a gong show that I tuned out long ago. If Katz ends up moving the team I'm fine with that but would be done with NHL hockey. Its quite pathetic how both Katz and the city of edmonton have acted throughout the entire negotiation.

raab is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 04:16 PM
  #878
CantHaveTkachev
not allowed!
 
CantHaveTkachev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: St. OILbert
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleed_oil View Post
The idea that he would move the team is more than ridiculous. Edmontonians, have some self respect as a municipality. Why is'nt the NHL moving Phoenix? Cause there are no viable markets to go to. Outside of a 2nd team in Toronto (the Leafs will fight this hard) and Quebec City (this will be an expansion market) where would Katz take the Oilers that he could make anywhere near the money he makes here. At the very worst he might sell the team, but the NHL has saturated there markets in North America.... I say let him sweat it out and make up at least a portion of the shortfall from his own pocket.
I thought it's cause they are tied to the Glendale lease agreement and if they break it, it will set a terrible precedent for lease agreements in professional sports

CantHaveTkachev is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 04:18 PM
  #879
raab
Where's the Hart?
 
raab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 7,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Last Dynasty View Post
I thought it's cause they are tied to the Glendale lease agreement and if they break it, it will set a terrible precedent for lease agreements in professional sports
That and the city of Glendale is paying them 25M year to stay there...

raab is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 04:47 PM
  #880
Tarus
Fire Mact
 
Tarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Last Dynasty View Post
I thought it's cause they are tied to the Glendale lease agreement and if they break it, it will set a terrible precedent for lease agreements in professional sports
Yep

Reason why they can't find any investors is because most of the potential owners that have shown interest are primarily interested in breaking the lease and moving the team elsewhere.

It's long been known that the lease agreement, recently built arena, and the NHL's loyalty to a city that is willing to bend over backwards despite being broke, are the main reasons the NHL hasn't just folded the franchise, and instead have spent years trying to keep the Coyotes in Phoenix.

Tarus is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 04:48 PM
  #881
Halibut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,098
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raab View Post
Didn't Bettman already say he wouldn't try to stop a move if Katz and the City couldn't arrive at an agreement? And Seattle is a very realistic relocation opportunity for Katz. There's what like a 2 hour drive from Van to Seattle. Any investor who couldn't get a season seat or a skybox in Van would most likely buy one in Seattle. On top of that you have a much larger demographic compared to Northern Alberta, so you could potentially receive some pretty good tv money.

Either way no matter what happens this Arena debate has turned into a gong show that I tuned out long ago. If Katz ends up moving the team I'm fine with that but would be done with NHL hockey. Its quite pathetic how both Katz and the city of edmonton have acted throughout the entire negotiation.
They already receive great TV money here.
They already sell out every seat here despite being a complete crap team for years on end.
They'd be a second tenant in a Seattle arena and not get any of the extra revenue they claim they need at the new arena.

There's no way around the fact that moving to Seattle would cost him lots of money. He'd be better off here even if he has to significantly increase either the lease money or the ticket tax.

Halibut is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 05:09 PM
  #882
raab
Where's the Hart?
 
raab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 7,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halibut View Post
They already receive great TV money here.
They already sell out every seat here despite being a complete crap team for years on end.
They'd be a second tenant in a Seattle arena and not get any of the extra revenue they claim they need at the new arena.

There's no way around the fact that moving to Seattle would cost him lots of money. He'd be better off here even if he has to significantly increase either the lease money or the ticket tax.
They wouldn't necessarily be the 2nd tenant. The NBA blocked the Sacramento to Seattle deal. If the team does stay here where is it going to be playing in 7-10 years if the new arena doesn't get built?

raab is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 05:13 PM
  #883
timekeep
Registered User
 
timekeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raab View Post
They wouldn't necessarily be the 2nd tenant. The NBA blocked the Sacramento to Seattle deal. If the team does stay here where is it going to be playing in 7-10 years if the new arena doesn't get built?
And now the arena deal is off, it was contingent on a return of NBA, wasn't it?

timekeep is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 05:25 PM
  #884
raab
Where's the Hart?
 
raab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 7,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by timekeep View Post
And now the arena deal is off, it was contingent on a return of NBA, wasn't it?
I don't believe so, but I haven't followed it that closely. I thought they were using the if you build it they will come motto but I might be off. Hansen and his group are presumably still going to try and relocate another NBA franchise just need to find the right one. I think the Millwaukee Bucks and Edmonton are in a similar predicament right now as far as arenas go.

raab is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 05:26 PM
  #885
Digger12
Registered User
 
Digger12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Defending the border
Posts: 14,738
vCash: 500
So I guess the reasoning behind Katz not being able to move the team is:

1 - We make SOOO much profit.
2 - There's nowhere else he can go! He's stuck here!
3 - The dollar will NEVER go down.

Is that it?

Today, that is true.

5-10 years from now, we'll see what happens. Rexall isn't getting any larger, the amount of luxury boxes are by far the lowest of all Canadian teams, and ticket prices are already among the priciest in the entire NHL. Where is the extra revenue going to come from to pay for an ever increasing bottom line?

I hope everyone's OK with going to 100% Pay Per View for all home games, for one example. That's one revenue stream that could be tapped into more I suppose.

I guess he could also turn the Oilers into a cap floor team, and order his GM to start trading off our stars for picks and cheaper prospects. Yay, it's the Doug Weight era again!

The thing is, there's only so many ways to keep this team a moneymaker if the arena isn't improved/enlarged. And ALL of them are painful for the fans. That's just the way this will go.

Digger12 is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 05:30 PM
  #886
raab
Where's the Hart?
 
raab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 7,453
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digger12 View Post
So I guess the reasoning behind Katz not being able to move the team is:

1 - We make SOOO much profit.
2 - There's nowhere else he can go! He's stuck here!
3 - The dollar will NEVER go down.

Is that it?

Today, that is true.

5-10 years from now, we'll see what happens. Rexall isn't getting any larger, the amount of luxury boxes are by far the lowest of all Canadian teams, and ticket prices are already among the priciest in the entire NHL. Where is the extra revenue going to come from to pay for an ever increasing bottom line?

I hope everyone's OK with going to 100% Pay Per View for all home games, for one example. That's one revenue stream that could be tapped into more I suppose.

I guess he could also turn the Oilers into a cap floor team, and order his GM to start trading off our stars for picks and cheaper prospects. Yay, it's the Doug Weight era again!

The thing is, there's only so many ways to keep this team a moneymaker if the arena isn't improved/enlarged. And ALL of them are painful for the fans. That's just the way this will go.
In 5-10 years Rexall won't be a realistic option as a venue IMO. So I'd like to know where city council and the citizens expect The Oilers to play if a new Arena isn't built. Especially when you consider it will probably take 3 years minimum to build it.

raab is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 05:50 PM
  #887
Halibut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,098
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digger12 View Post
The thing is, there's only so many ways to keep this team a moneymaker if the arena isn't improved/enlarged. And ALL of them are painful for the fans. That's just the way this will go.
So improve/enlarge it but dont think that the city should pay for everything. Very few people if any are suggesting remaining at Rexall with or without renovations. I'm pretty sure 99% of people would agree with a new arena if it wasnt being built on the back of taxpayers. A lot of people will accept some taxpayers involvement. I think most would be ok with the current deal if the province kicked in money.

It's definitely true that he will take a hit moving the team anywhere outside Canada. There are no open large eastern american cities with a hockey history that dont have a team. Any place else in the states is questionable as a market compared to Edmonton. In Canada there are other problems. Quebec dont want an owner so unless he's going to sell he cant move there. If he can get into the GTA he might do better but he's going to have to pay up to move there. No way the league lets him just move in without paying some kind of fee. They'll get half a billion in expansion fees and wont just waive that for Katz in the GTA or in Quebec.

Halibut is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 05:53 PM
  #888
oilers2k10
Yak Don't Back Down
 
oilers2k10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 2,394
vCash: 500
what the heck I'm not from Alberta, always cheered for oilers growin up and if they get moved to Seattle or somethin good for them! I'll follow them wherever they go.
I live near Winnipeg, even we could get a new arena built here, why cant Edmonton which has a much higher population in the city and surrounding areas not get one made is pathetic.

oilers2k10 is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 05:56 PM
  #889
Moonlapse Vertigo
Katz n' MacT BFFs
 
Moonlapse Vertigo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raab View Post
I don't believe so, but I haven't followed it that closely. I thought they were using the if you build it they will come motto but I might be off. Hansen and his group are presumably still going to try and relocate another NBA franchise just need to find the right one. I think the Millwaukee Bucks and Edmonton are in a similar predicament right now as far as arenas go.
The Seattle arena agreement is contingent on Hansen and company successfully luring an NBA franchise to Seattle. For a while it looked like the Sacramento Kings were moving there for sure but that deal has gone sideways. Hansen and his group are in a good position though; NBA teams move all the time. They just have to stay patient.

Moonlapse Vertigo is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 06:00 PM
  #890
SeriousBusiness
T.Hall da man
 
SeriousBusiness's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oilers2k10 View Post
what the heck I'm not from Alberta, always cheered for oilers growin up and if they get moved to Seattle or somethin good for them! I'll follow them wherever they go.
I live near Winnipeg, even we could get a new arena built here, why cant Edmonton which has a much higher population in the city and surrounding areas not get one made is pathetic.
There's two big reasons:

1. An incompetent city counsel.

2. A general dislike among Edmontonians to spend money on anything that isn't snow plowing or pothole filling.

SeriousBusiness is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 06:17 PM
  #891
Moonlapse Vertigo
Katz n' MacT BFFs
 
Moonlapse Vertigo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,070
vCash: 500
Paula Simons chimes in on the Capital Region Board's vote...

Quote:
Paula Simons ‏@Paulatics 3m
@dstaples Sorry, I've been out of town all day. But this looks like a big political win for Mandel to me.

Moonlapse Vertigo is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 06:35 PM
  #892
17Kurri
Registered User
 
17Kurri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,292
vCash: 833
Btw, in case it hasn't been posted before and you want to support the arena district project, you can add your input here:

http://www.yegdt.ca/bigpicture/

17Kurri is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 07:46 PM
  #893
bleed_oil
Registered User
 
bleed_oil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,833
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Last Dynasty View Post
I thought it's cause they are tied to the Glendale lease agreement and if they break it, it will set a terrible precedent for lease agreements in professional sports
I may be mistaken but I dont think the team has any sort of binding lease in Glendale. And yes it would set a terrible precident if they moved the team, it would be sending a message to cities that finance building of arenas that they may get burned.... BUT all that said the situation in Glendale is not workable as is quite obvious from the financials - no one wants to buy the team. That goes back to our discussion, if the league had a great market to move the team to - they would. But they dont. Quebec City is intending to build a new rink, but there are no shovels in the ground yet. Seattle is'nt happening since they wont be building a rink for the NBA team. That means we could call Katz's bluff. Where does he move this team? Seattle? To Key Arena? Improbable.

bleed_oil is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 08:07 PM
  #894
Tarus
Fire Mact
 
Tarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleed_oil View Post
I may be mistaken but I dont think the team has any sort of binding lease in Glendale. And yes it would set a terrible precident if they moved the team, it would be sending a message to cities that finance building of arenas that they may get burned.... BUT all that said the situation in Glendale is not workable as is quite obvious from the financials - no one wants to buy the team. That goes back to our discussion, if the league had a great market to move the team to - they would. But they dont. Quebec City is intending to build a new rink, but there are no shovels in the ground yet. Seattle is'nt happening since they wont be building a rink for the NBA team. That means we could call Katz's bluff. Where does he move this team? Seattle? To Key Arena? Improbable.
They have a 30 year lease that extends to 2033, with a clause that would force anyone attempting to move the tea out of Glendale to pay out upwards of 750 million dollars to the city.

It's why every owner has to run the gauntlet of legal proceedings to revise the agreement to more favorable terms(it costs the team too much per year), and the only real option the NHL has is to fold the franchise outright if they want to try relocation.

Greg Jamison is the most recent prospective owner to fail to come up with the capital to satisfy Glendale's financial requirements on the revised lease agreement.

Tarus is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 09:02 PM
  #895
Billybaroo*
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 737
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeriousBusiness View Post
There's two big reasons:

1. An incompetent city counsel.

2. A general dislike among Edmontonians to spend money on anything that isn't snow plowing or pothole filling.
Forgot to add an owner with little/no integrity who reneges on everything he agrees to.
And oh, btw I think the City has committed just a few bucks. Just a bit .

Billybaroo* is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 09:07 PM
  #896
molsonmuscle360
Registered User
 
molsonmuscle360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Ft. McMurray Ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,428
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halibut View Post
Money they get comes from the locals the athlete is more likely to spend a larger portion of that cash elsewhere. Net effect, money moving outwards.
I call total ******** on said theory. Alberta as a whole would gain money in that aspect, because a large number of NHL players are from Alberta and spend time here in the off-season. Plus the crazy amounts of money that visiting teams often spend in local service establishments (bars, casino's, restaurants). From friends of mine in the Casino industry, they absolutely love when the Ducks have an extra day in town. A couple of heavy players and heavy tippers in that group apparently. A lot more people then just Daryl Katz win by having a hockey team here

molsonmuscle360 is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 09:18 PM
  #897
smackdaddy
Hall-RNH-Eberle
 
smackdaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleed_oil View Post
The idea that he would move the team is more than ridiculous. Edmontonians, have some self respect as a municipality. Why is'nt the NHL moving Phoenix? Cause there are no viable markets to go to. Outside of a 2nd team in Toronto (the Leafs will fight this hard) and Quebec City (this will be an expansion market) where would Katz take the Oilers that he could make anywhere near the money he makes here. At the very worst he might sell the team, but the NHL has saturated there markets in North America.... I say let him sweat it out and make up at least a portion of the shortfall from his own pocket.
This is getting stupid and a lot of people here are showing their true understanding of this situation, which is to say nil.

They're not moving from Phoenix because the city of Glendale built a new arena for the Coyotes to play in. The NHL is not giving up on that market. Plain and simple. Bettman is showing future owners and potential markets that they will do their best to keep those franchises in those cities that have built new arenas.

There are many other markets that the Coyotes could relocate to and many that are waiting in the wings for expansion and/or relocation. Including: Quebec City, Seattle, Kansas City, Las Vegas, Houston, Hamilton to name a few.

And Katz isn't going to move the team, all he's going to do is sell it. The new owner will not likely be a local (No more billionaires left in Edmonton) nor would he really see any interest in keeping the Oilers in a market that is tiny and completely saturated with no economically viable arena. So he'll just move it to some new market.

That's the reality. The hubris that Edmonton will get another team or that this team will never move is astounding. You really willing to call that bluff? Did you forget how close they were to moving last time?

Hopefully the decision makers in this city will make the right decision and do what it takes to get this thing going before the cost estimates become so stale it needs another $5M/year addendum.

smackdaddy is offline  
Old
05-09-2013, 09:24 PM
  #898
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Replacement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great Ones View Post
Truth is, Katz is the only one who's stepped up.

I don't see anyone else doing it. So someone else is going to move a team here and build a new arena for us? Who? If it's as easy as that, why is no one else stepping up now to help out? We had the EIG years ago and they didn't have the deep pockets for an arena. So what's the alternative? Where is this mythical billionaire private investor/oiler fan and where can we get hold of him?
Sure he stepped up. Undoubtedly because he saw value in the team and liked the idea of owning the team. Lets be clear here too. Katz bought a team from EIG who suffered through the truly bad precap years where it was difficult to ice a competitive team what with payroll disparity. But EIG managed to run an org that actually got in the playoffs. Katz has sat by owning a cluster**** org that is wasting his money chronically on the stupidest contracts. The same Katz is claiming to be losing money when he's the owner of a small market team that ought to have benefitted in every way from the nuances of two owner favorable CBA's.

Kats has had every ownership advantage relative to what EIG had and he pissed it away while crying poor.

How much sympathy should anybody have for an org thats spend like idiots on dolts, fails to make the playoffs 7 yrs in a row, then complains about not making enough money, who happen to be in top half of NHL revenue owners.

Heres a thought. Sometimes when a business doesn't make money its because of incompetence and not being worthy to compete in the marketplace.

This reminds of the GM bailouts.

Replacement is online now  
Old
05-09-2013, 09:33 PM
  #899
Replacement
Now with 9% more zen
 
Replacement's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Hockey Hell
Country: Canada
Posts: 37,331
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by molsonmuscle360 View Post
I call total ******** on said theory. Alberta as a whole would gain money in that aspect, because a large number of NHL players are from Alberta and spend time here in the off-season. Plus the crazy amounts of money that visiting teams often spend in local service establishments (bars, casino's, restaurants). From friends of mine in the Casino industry, they absolutely love when the Ducks have an extra day in town. A couple of heavy players and heavy tippers in that group apparently. A lot more people then just Daryl Katz win by having a hockey team here
Sorry to single out your post but the trickle down effect as applied thus is abject nonsense and would have a negligible impact on the economy. Could it have an impact on one specific hotel, one specific Casino, a few restaurants? Sure.

But if one really wants to factor in the input of what a few millionaires spend here the very few days/months they are in town one has to look at the other side of the ledger which is that 80-90M/yr Obtained Oiler revenue is taken OUT of the pockets of mostly residents and serves as payroll for many players that don't even live here and quite a few that don't even pay income tax or provincial tax here. I have no idea how people can argue in good faith about the one side of the ledger without subtracting the other. Guess what that leaves the economy with? With outflowing dollars.

The trickle down concept is generally considered weak, is highly criticized, and simply doesn't impact people all down the food chain. The trickle down effect is propped up as a made up societal benefit that attempts to say all classes benefit when gross disparities in income are allowed in a society. Kind of an appease the masses lie in most instances.

How well has the societal "trickle down" effect worked in the US where the concept was so highly touted? I seem to recall millions losing their houses, jobs, economic lives while an unprecedented rich class gained untold wealth. Some trickle down.

So I'd tend to shove "trickle down" where the sun don't shine.

Replacement is online now  
Old
05-09-2013, 10:00 PM
  #900
molsonmuscle360
Registered User
 
molsonmuscle360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Ft. McMurray Ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,428
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
Sorry to single out your post but the trickle down effect as applied thus is abject nonsense and would have a negligible impact on the economy. Could it have an impact on one specific hotel, one specific Casino, a few restaurants? Sure.

But if one really wants to factor in the input of what a few millionaires spend here the very few days/months they are in town one has to look at the other side of the ledger which is that 80-90M/yr Obtained Oiler revenue is taken OUT of the pockets of mostly residents and serves as payroll for many players that don't even live here and quite a few that don't even pay income tax or provincial tax here. I have no idea how people can argue in good faith about the one side of the ledger without subtracting the other. Guess what that leaves the economy with? With outflowing dollars.

The trickle down concept is generally considered weak, is highly criticized, and simply doesn't impact people all down the food chain. The trickle down effect is propped up as a made up societal benefit that attempts to say all classes benefit when gross disparities in income are allowed in a society. Kind of an appease the masses lie in most instances.

How well has the societal "trickle down" effect worked in the US where the concept was so highly touted? I seem to recall millions losing their houses, jobs, economic lives while an unprecedented rich class gained untold wealth. Some trickle down.

So I'd tend to shove "trickle down" where the sun don't shine.
A lot of what I was trying to point out was he was saying NHL players from all cities take their money "home" in the off-season. Well, many NHL players call Alberta home, so therefore that theory of his that all the hockey money goes off somewhere else is wrong.

molsonmuscle360 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 11:47 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.