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.

Metro Seattle: NHL, NBA and Arena - Part IV

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-04-2012, 02:58 PM
  #76
Ugmo
Registered User
 
Ugmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Country: Austria
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
Do you have any idea on how difficult it is to get anything build sports related facilities the state of Washington built. Quebec City doesn't have to deal with I-91 like Seattle has to. How are they suppose to pay off the 200m in bonds if there is no team or teams coming here. Hansen has a right to want a return on his investment.
Exactly... which is why QC is a more likely destination for the Coyotes than Seattle at the moment. You just made his argument for him, dude!

Ugmo is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 03:00 PM
  #77
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,450
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patofqc View Post
Quebec City is getting a new arena, Seattle? In Seattle they get an arena only if they get a team... Almost blackmailing the NHL... Gary does not like to be blackmailed in giving teams. Just trying to put things in perspective to all Seattle people. You guys just aint ready for the Coyotes this summer. I am trying to prepare you guys for a dissapointement. And if the Coyotes stay we will all be dissapointed...
As I said in a post a short while back... Winnipeg's MTS arena was completed in 2004, but the city didn't get a team until 2011. You're just talking about Quebec City putting shovels in the ground this summer; that says almost zero about when the city will actually get a team. Kansas City's arena is already built, so what about a team going there first?

If Quebec City actually gets a team before Seattle then be happy about; but until either city gets a team, it's all speculation.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 03:08 PM
  #78
Undertakerqc
Registered User
 
Undertakerqc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
As I said in a post a short while back... Winnipeg's MTS arena was completed in 2004, but the city didn't get a team until 2011. You're just talking about Quebec City putting shovels in the ground this summer; that says almost zero about when the city will actually get a team. Kansas City's arena is already built, so what about a team going there first?

If Quebec City actually gets a team before Seattle then be happy about; but until either city gets a team, it's all speculation.
Agreed its all speculation, but all the signs from the league points to the Coyotes moving to Quebec City if they have to move. Quebec City is much more advanced then any other city. They have a clear owner who has talked many times with the league and made formal presentation. The arena plan is well under way with digging starting this summer. The confidence PKP as shown in his last statements. Just read the last interview Bettman gave to QMI of all media outlets just point that way. Plus Bettman wants to go back in cities that lost their team not because of lack of fan support like Winnipeg.

That does not mean Seattle will not get a team someday, just not the Coyotes this summer if they move, you guys are not ready enought.

Undertakerqc is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 03:10 PM
  #79
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ugmo View Post
Exactly... which is why QC is a more likely destination for the Coyotes than Seattle at the moment. You just made his argument for him, dude!
I should have also added so does the city and county that wants a return on their investment.

Right now all the focus going on getting the arena plan approved then they can deal with trying to secure the teams. My concern is that we may have to go to plan b for that arena which is Bellevue and from what i am hearing regarding that front that group will build the arena regardless if they get a team or not.


Last edited by gstommylee: 03-04-2012 at 03:17 PM.
gstommylee is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 03:16 PM
  #80
gstommylee
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patofqc View Post
Agreed its all speculation, but all the signs from the league points to the Coyotes moving to Quebec City if they have to move. Quebec City is much more advanced then any other city. They have a clear owner who has talked many times with the league and made formal presentation. The arena plan is well under way with digging starting this summer. The confidence PKP as shown in his last statements. Just read the last interview Bettman gave to QMI of all media outlets just point that way. Plus Bettman wants to go back in cities that lost their team not because of lack of fan support like Winnipeg.

That does not mean Seattle will not get a team someday, just not the Coyotes this summer if they move
Right now at this very moment all the signs are point at QC cause they are the only one with an approved arena plan but that can easily change once seattle's arena plan gets approved. However until the board of governors approve the sale and relocation of the coyotes to QC do not assume that its going to happen. And just as a reminder i have dropped my stance that the coyotes will be the team that ends up moving to Seattle.


Last edited by gstommylee: 03-04-2012 at 03:25 PM.
gstommylee is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 03:42 PM
  #81
Undertakerqc
Registered User
 
Undertakerqc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gstommylee View Post
Right now at this very moment all the signs are point at QC cause they are the only one with an approved arena plan but that can easily change once seattle's arena plan gets approved. However until the board of governors approve the sale and relocation of the coyotes to QC do not assume that its going to happen. And just as a reminder i have dropped my stance that the coyotes will be the team that ends up moving to Seattle.
I know Tommy, the team is still in Phoenix for now. Until relocation is the option the Coyotes, nothing is certain. And BTW, you guys will get a team, its not if but when.


Last edited by Undertakerqc: 03-04-2012 at 03:47 PM.
Undertakerqc is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 05:45 PM
  #82
tank44
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Seattle, WA
Country: Canada
Posts: 170
vCash: 500
Yes Quebec is the main competition for Seattle but we do not need 3-4 "but we're due" or "we're owed a team". One major problem with Quebec is that it could very likely become the next Atlanta & lose their team twice if the Canadian dollar tanks compared to the US dollar in the next 10 years. This is one problem I have with the NHL and the fact that Canadians are keeping the league afloat in that it will not be able to always keep the league afloat - see the early 90s where Winnipeg & Quebec lost their teams and Edmonton, Calgary & Vancouver were all speculated as possible relocation cities. The Canadian dollar was 60 cents to the US dollar and that itself is a major reason the teams couldn't survive. Now that the dollars at par with each other, it's like around 1980 where the two currencies were the same - and you know what else happened at that time? Winnipeg & Quebec got their initial NHL teams from the WHA.


Last edited by Hank Chinaski: 03-04-2012 at 06:08 PM. Reason: not needed
tank44 is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 05:54 PM
  #83
The CyNick
Follow @ TheCyNick
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,705
vCash: 500
I havent seen too many economists reporting that the CDN dollar will hit those lows again.

Sure, anything could happen, but you go with what makes sense today, and what is likely in the future.

Quebec City, and a team in Southern Ontario or Toronto are far better options than Seattle. Thats just logic. Doesnt mean it will go down like that though.

The CyNick is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 05:58 PM
  #84
dronald
Registered User
 
dronald's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Hamilton, ON
Posts: 1,165
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tank44 View Post
Yes Quebec is the main competition for Seattle but we do not need 3-4 "but we're due" or "we're owed a team". One major problem with Quebec is that it could very likely become the next Atlanta & lose their team twice if the Canadian dollar tanks compared to the US dollar in the next 10 years. This is one problem I have with the NHL and the fact that Canadians are keeping the league afloat in that it will not be able to always keep the league afloat - see the early 90s where Winnipeg & Quebec lost their teams and Edmonton, Calgary & Vancouver were all speculated as possible relocation cities. The Canadian dollar was 60 cents to the US dollar and that itself is a major reason the teams couldn't survive. Now that the dollars at par with each other, it's like around 1980 where the two currencies were the same - and you know what else happened at that time? Winnipeg & Quebec got their initial NHL teams from the WHA.
WPG proves the NHL isn't too worried about this.


Last edited by Hank Chinaski: 03-04-2012 at 06:08 PM. Reason: qep
dronald is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 06:00 PM
  #85
maruk14
Registered User
 
maruk14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The CyNick View Post
I havent seen too many economists reporting that the CDN dollar will hit those lows again.

Sure, anything could happen, but you go with what makes sense today, and what is likely in the future.

Quebec City, and a team in Southern Ontario or Toronto are far better options than Seattle. Thats just logic. Doesnt mean it will go down like that though.
No ... That's your opinion, which is a big difference. The NHL obviously feels otherwise or they would have placed a team in Southern Ontario when Ballsile was trying to get a team (based on what has happened since, good thing he didn't). They also wouldn't be expressing interest in Seattle if that was "logic".

And again, this is a thread about Seattle and it's arenas and the possibilities of an NHL team.


Last edited by Hank Chinaski: 03-04-2012 at 09:38 PM. Reason: not needed
maruk14 is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 06:22 PM
  #86
Undertakerqc
Registered User
 
Undertakerqc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tank44 View Post
Yes Quebec is the main competition for Seattle but we do not need 3-4 "but we're due" or "we're owed a team". One major problem with Quebec is that it could very likely become the next Atlanta & lose their team twice if the Canadian dollar tanks compared to the US dollar in the next 10 years. This is one problem I have with the NHL and the fact that Canadians are keeping the league afloat in that it will not be able to always keep the league afloat - see the early 90s where Winnipeg & Quebec lost their teams and Edmonton, Calgary & Vancouver were all speculated as possible relocation cities. The Canadian dollar was 60 cents to the US dollar and that itself is a major reason the teams couldn't survive. Now that the dollars at par with each other, it's like around 1980 where the two currencies were the same - and you know what else happened at that time? Winnipeg & Quebec got their initial NHL teams from the WHA.
Well the dollars is not expected to dip for a very long time. Canada will soon become the number one oil exporting country in the world, so that will keed the dollar high, and its not only oil but all natural ressources which puts un upward demand for the Canadian Dollar. But even if it would drop, there is now revenu sharing and a salary cap which was not there when the Nords left.

Undertakerqc is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 08:13 PM
  #87
htpwn
Registered User
 
htpwn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Poland
Posts: 13,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tank44 View Post
Yes Quebec is the main competition for Seattle but we do not need 3-4 "but we're due" or "we're owed a team". One major problem with Quebec is that it could very likely become the next Atlanta & lose their team twice if the Canadian dollar tanks compared to the US dollar in the next 10 years. This is one problem I have with the NHL and the fact that Canadians are keeping the league afloat in that it will not be able to always keep the league afloat - see the early 90s where Winnipeg & Quebec lost their teams and Edmonton, Calgary & Vancouver were all speculated as possible relocation cities. The Canadian dollar was 60 cents to the US dollar and that itself is a major reason the teams couldn't survive. Now that the dollars at par with each other, it's like around 1980 where the two currencies were the same - and you know what else happened at that time? Winnipeg & Quebec got their initial NHL teams from the WHA.
If we're going to bringing up the Canadian dollar theoretically dropping over 40 cents against the American one in the next 10 years, then we might as well discuss how Seattle is the next Phoenix. Basketball-first town, little recent pro hockey history, big losses would be required in an ill-suited venue, etc.

Its a good thing for both the league and residents of both cities that neither scenario is looking particularly likely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by maruk14 View Post
No ... That's your opinion, which is a big difference. The NHL obviously feels otherwise or they would have placed a team in Southern Ontario when Ballsile was trying to get a team (based on what has happened since, good thing he didn't). They also wouldn't be expressing interest in Seattle if that was "logic".

And again, this is a thread about Seattle and it's arenas and the possibilities of an NHL team. Go talk about QC in that thread or one about a team in Southern Ontario
Quebec City is his opinion, Southern Ontario on the other hand is probably closer to a fact.

The reasons the league has yet to place a team in Southern Ontario are three-fold: 1) Lack of an Arena: Both Bettman and Daly have consistently said Copps Coliseum is not an NHL venue. An proposed arena in one of Toronto's northern suburbs could change this. 2) Territory: According to the NHL constitution, the Leafs have the right to veto any team moving into their territory. The NHL claims they don't due to a by-law adopted in the 1990s to avoid anti-trust laws. 3) Ownership: The NHL hated Balsillie. Actually, hated may be an understatement.

The reason there is not a second team in Southern Ontario is not the market. The league itself conceded during the Coyotes' bankruptcy hearings that it believes a team in Southern Ontario would be one of the top 5 most profitable teams. It is the other issues that prevent them from moving to what the majority here believe is the biggest gold mine left in North America.

htpwn is online now  
Old
03-04-2012, 09:00 PM
  #88
Nuclear SUV
Registered User
 
Nuclear SUV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 498
vCash: 500
You can't compare Seattle with Phoenix, especially when it comes to sports.

- Seattle is a better sports town than Phoenix. Seattle has led MLB, the NBA, and MLS in total attendance multiple times while Seahawks have sold out most of the games in their existence. The Washington Huskies football team are consistently the best supported team west of the Rockies, leading the Pac-10 in attendance the most times in the last 25 years.

- Seattle is in/near hockey country. They play the game on frozen ponds just east of town. 2,000 more people play hockey in Washington than Arizona and Georgia combined. The only states to never have NHL hockey with a higher hockey participation level than Washington are Alaska and Wisconsin. More people play hockey in Washington than Missouri (home to an NHL franchise) and North Dakota (a.k.a. American Saskatchewan).

- Seattle supports hockey. The combined per game attendance of the two WHL teams has been over 10,000 in many years

- Seattle is near Canada, not Mexico. Near the third largest population center in Canada that has perpetual sellouts of the NHL leaving many fans shutout from the live game

- The Seattle area is the hub of the 5th fastest growing state in the U.S. Boeing, Amazon, and Google are all booming and expanding. Amazon alone is building three 500 foot tall skyscrapers in downtown Seattle. Those three companies, and others like Microsoft, Paccar (parent company of Kenworth & Peterbilt), Nintendo, Expedia, Costco, etc. have been attracting significant amounts of workers from traditional hockey hotbeds, like New England and the Midwest.

- The Portland, Oregon market (2,500,000+ people when including SW Washington), will also help support a Seattle franchise. Both the Mariners and Seahawks attract a significant number of fans from Oregon. The Seahawks and Washington Huskies football team also draw fans from hockey crazy Alaska.

- Seattle has a metro area of 4,200,000 people. Another 3,000,000 people live within a few hours drive to the north. Another 3,000,000 people live within a few hours drive to the south. Another 1,400,000 live in Eastern Washington across Snoqualmie Pass.

- Seattle will have a local NHL rival from day one with Vancouver. The two cities are 145 miles apart from each other.

Nuclear SUV is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 09:20 PM
  #89
The CyNick
Follow @ TheCyNick
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,705
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by maruk14 View Post
No ... That's your opinion, which is a big difference. The NHL obviously feels otherwise or they would have placed a team in Southern Ontario when Ballsile was trying to get a team (based on what has happened since, good thing he didn't). They also wouldn't be expressing interest in Seattle if that was "logic".

And again, this is a thread about Seattle and it's arenas and the possibilities of an NHL team. Go talk about QC in that thread or one about a team in Southern Ontario
The issue with Jim B was the way he went about his business. He tried to basically ram his plan down the NHL's throats. In comparison to how the Winnipeg guys did it, where they sat back, showed quiet interest, set everything up to be ready, and got the team. I believe the same will happen with Quebec City this off season.

Of course Bettman will listen if Seattle has a plan to take a team. I problem as I see it is you had people tying interest in an NBA team with an NHL team. You guys could very well get a team, and if you do, I hope its successful. I dont live in Quebec City, so it doesnt impact me one way or the other where the Coyotes go.

But I follow these stories fairly closely, and in my opinion, there are other markets that have a better chance of getting a team.


Last edited by Hank Chinaski: 03-04-2012 at 09:39 PM. Reason: discuss post, not poster
The CyNick is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 09:40 PM
  #90
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,464
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by htpwn View Post
If we're going to bringing up the Canadian dollar theoretically dropping over 40 cents against the American one in the next 10 years, then we might as well discuss how Seattle is the next Phoenix. Basketball-first town, little recent pro hockey history, big losses would be required in an ill-suited venue, etc.

Its a good thing for both the league and residents of both cities that neither scenario is looking particularly likely.



Quebec City is his opinion, Southern Ontario on the other hand is probably closer to a fact.

The reasons the league has yet to place a team in Southern Ontario are three-fold: 1) Lack of an Arena: Both Bettman and Daly have consistently said Copps Coliseum is not an NHL venue. An proposed arena in one of Toronto's northern suburbs could change this. 2) Territory: According to the NHL constitution, the Leafs have the right to veto any team moving into their territory. The NHL claims they don't due to a by-law adopted in the 1990s to avoid anti-trust laws. 3) Ownership: The NHL hated Balsillie. Actually, hated may be an understatement.

The reason there is not a second team in Southern Ontario is not the market. The league itself conceded during the Coyotes' bankruptcy hearings that it believes a team in Southern Ontario would be one of the top 5 most profitable teams. It is the other issues that prevent them from moving to what the majority here believe is the biggest gold mine left in North America.
Seattle is a way better sports town then Toronto for starters.

Melrose Munch is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 09:42 PM
  #91
maruk14
Registered User
 
maruk14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,917
vCash: 500
The Leafs ( and to a lesser extent the Sabres) are a major reason why there isn't a Southern Ontario team and those objections will always exist.

Like it or not, Seattle gets an arena suitable for the NHL and it is very likely a team ends up here. The league has had its eyes on this market for a very long time. It can be argued a team in QC or a team in Southern Ont. would be dividing up revenues that for the most part already exist.

The difference between Seattle and a lot of other non-NHL US markets is there is already a built in hockey culture here, whether our Canadian friends want to believe that or not, and it can easily be argued the pie would grow here instead of just shifting dollars around.

maruk14 is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 10:05 PM
  #92
PearJuice*
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,109
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by maruk14 View Post
The Leafs ( and to a lesser extent the Sabres) are a major reason why there isn't a Southern Ontario team and those objections will always exist.

Like it or not, Seattle gets an arena suitable for the NHL and it is very likely a team ends up here. The league has had its eyes on this market for a very long time. It can be argued a team in QC or a team in Southern Ont. would be dividing up revenues that for the most part already exist.

The difference between Seattle and a lot of other non-NHL US markets is there is already a built in hockey culture here, whether our Canadian friends want to believe that or not, and it can easily be argued the pie would grow here instead of just shifting dollars around.
As a Canadian, I believe that Seattle has a hockey culture. No doubt about it.

PearJuice* is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 11:38 PM
  #93
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
 
MAROONSRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maroons Rd.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PearJuice View Post
As a Canadian, I believe that Seattle has a hockey culture. No doubt about it.
Really?

Washington population: 6.7 million
Arena maps entries: 32

Quebec population: 7.9 million
Arena maps entries: 383

Or you could look at BC:

BC population: 4.7 million
Arena maps entries: 200

http://www.arenamaps.com/

MAROONSRoad is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 11:40 PM
  #94
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,464
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAROONSRoad View Post
Really?

Washington population: 6.7 million
Arena maps entries: 32

Quebec population: 7.9 million
Arena maps entries: 383

Or you could look at BC:

BC population: 4.7 million
Arena maps entries: 200

http://www.arenamaps.com/
What does this have to do with anything?

Melrose Munch is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 11:45 PM
  #95
MAROONSRoad
f/k/a Ghost
 
MAROONSRoad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Maroons Rd.
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose Munch View Post
What does this have to do with anything?
Read the post I was responding to. You don't think that the number of hockey rinks in a location is indicative of the "hockey culture" that exists there? I do.

MAROONSRoad is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 11:52 PM
  #96
JawandaPuck
Moderator
Lost Art of Dynasty
 
JawandaPuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Vancouver BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,316
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAROONSRoad View Post
Read the post I was responding to. You don't think that the number of hockey rinks in a location is indicative of the "hockey culture" that exists there? I do.
You should post the numbers for the state of New York. It would give you ammunition to make an argument that the NHL should move two of the three teams in that state to Toronto (or maybe even Winnipeg).

__________________
Follow JawandaPuck on Twitter and Blogspot - all revenue from Google Ads is donated to the Canucks for Kids Fund (CFKF) in support of the Canucks Autism Network (CAN).
JawandaPuck is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 11:53 PM
  #97
maruk14
Registered User
 
maruk14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAROONSRoad View Post
Read the post I was responding to. You don't think that the number of hockey rinks in a location is indicative of the "hockey culture" that exists there? I do.
So it seems your argument is these Canadian markets have more of a hockey culture than Seattle ... Are you arguing against yourself here? Who exactly is arguing the other side?

However ... The Seattle area is home to 2 WHL teams that collectively draw about 10k fans per game. In addition, the entire state of Washington supports 4 WHL teams and right across the river in Portland is a 5th. There is absolutely a culture here ... Adding an NHL team would cause it to swell, similar to what we are seeing in the MLS.

maruk14 is offline  
Old
03-04-2012, 11:54 PM
  #98
MuzikMachine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 693
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAROONSRoad View Post
Read the post I was responding to. You don't think that the number of hockey rinks in a location is indicative of the "hockey culture" that exists there? I do.
I would believe that "hockey culture" exists in Seattle, it would not be to the same extent as Canadian markets and is an unfair comparison, but it still exists.

MuzikMachine is offline  
Old
03-05-2012, 12:18 AM
  #99
Nuclear SUV
Registered User
 
Nuclear SUV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAROONSRoad View Post
Really?
Are you saying it does not have a hockey culture? If so, that's bunk.

Read my post above.

Nuclear SUV is offline  
Old
03-05-2012, 12:21 AM
  #100
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,464
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MAROONSRoad View Post
Read the post I was responding to. You don't think that the number of hockey rinks in a location is indicative of the "hockey culture" that exists there? I do.
We have more rinks in Toronto then Winnipeg. So what.

Melrose Munch 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 06:06 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.