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.

It's Not About Winning Or Losing. It's About Who Gets The Blame (CBA/Lockout) XVI

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-26-2012, 09:45 PM
  #851
haseoke39
Brainfart 4 Reinhart
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,503
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scoobs View Post
In big business, the ones with the money always win. The NHL is big business. Players may be millionaires, but when you're dealing with billionaires you are always going to lose. That isn't to say that there shouldn't be concessions made on part of the owners towards the players, though. If it is indeed a battle of who is willing to blink first, the players can hold out but eventually they will lose. The longer they hold out, the less willing owners are going to be to give them concessions.

I get the feeling that Fehr is going to re-open the 2004 can-o-worms with the cap, though. Him and the NHLPA seem to want to re-fight the 2004-05 battle.
Right conclusion, wrong reasoning.

How much money each individual has to live on is totally irrelevant. Almost everybody at the table will never have to work again if they don't want to.

What's relevant is how much money each side loses by cancelling games. NHL makes $120M/year, net. Players makes $1.9B/year.

If the NHL made money off the game, they'd be saying let's get back on the ice, even if we have to pay a little bit more than we think is right! But they don't. So they're willing to cancel games almost indefinitely - makes no difference to them, they're not losing anything that gave them anything substantial. Put it this way: the difference between the last two offers made was ~$500M, for all five years. The players almost certainly lost that much when November was cancelled, meaning even if the NHL comes and takes their last offer tomorrow, they've already screwed themselves out of money. The NHL owners, on the other hand, would have to cancel 4 consecutive seasons before they would screw themselves out of $500M.

Which side do you think will crack first? The side losing $500M in 25 games, or the side making $500M in four years?

haseoke39 is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 09:46 PM
  #852
Flamingo
Registered User
 
Flamingo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 3,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeLH View Post
That was in interesting point from the first day on when those many contracts before the end of the old CBA were signed. I think that Suter is making a good point. To me that wasn't negotiation in good faith if the owners thought on the big contracts: 'oh well, why not 5 million more, we'll roll them back anyways' ...
You're kidding yourself if you think the players and their agents weren't aware of the pending CBA negotiations and possible implications.

Flamingo is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 09:57 PM
  #853
jeety mcjeet
Registered User
 
jeety mcjeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 460
vCash: 500
Is it possible that at some point the NHL decides that ridding themselves of the Fehr brothers is the number one priority?

jeety mcjeet is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 10:02 PM
  #854
SidTheKid8787
Registered User
 
SidTheKid8787's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 6,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Right conclusion, wrong reasoning.

How much money each individual has to live on is totally irrelevant. Almost everybody at the table will never have to work again if they don't want to.

What's relevant is how much money each side loses by cancelling games. NHL makes $120M/year, net. Players makes $1.9B/year.

If the NHL made money off the game, they'd be saying let's get back on the ice, even if we have to pay a little bit more than we think is right! But they don't. So they're willing to cancel games almost indefinitely - makes no difference to them, they're not losing anything that gave them anything substantial. Put it this way: the difference between the last two offers made was ~$500M, for all five years. The players almost certainly lost that much when November was cancelled, meaning even if the NHL comes and takes their last offer tomorrow, they've already screwed themselves out of money. The NHL owners, on the other hand, would have to cancel 4 consecutive seasons before they would screw themselves out of $500M.

Which side do you think will crack first? The side losing $500M in 25 games, or the side making $500M in four years?
Good post and is probably something players should read as well. All the rhetoric aside, most individual teams in the NHL aren't really big business in terms of profit. They handle alot of money but too much has been going out and not coming in.

The balance has to be shifted, it's as simple as that. The money going out is going to be slashed so where do you make the cuts if that is the case?

SidTheKid8787 is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 10:03 PM
  #855
JoeLH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 679
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flamingo View Post
You're kidding yourself if you think the players and their agents weren't aware of the pending CBA negotiations and possible implications.
Sure they were. But then we're at a point were a business as a whole, in big difference to 8 years ago, makes profit and not losses. So to me there's no need to cut existing contracts, especially as the players are willing to accept a smaller HRR share than before.

JoeLH is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 10:04 PM
  #856
AlienLanes82
Registered User
 
AlienLanes82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Country: South Africa
Posts: 667
vCash: 500
If only the mean, rich owners would budge on the players' selfless demands for better work conditions, benefits, and increased salaries for AHL players, rink staff, ticket agents, and team employees, a deal would have already been done.

What's that? Those aren't part of the players' demands? Don't they realize that these good people may have to work for the rest of their life if the NHLPA doesn't stand up for them?

Situations like this lockout show people's true priorities. The NHLPA could bargain for anything they cared about - for better health care plans for team employees, for example (you know - the guys earning 10% of a 4th liner's salary). The reality is that all they care about is their own well-being. Nothing wrong with that, IMO, but please spare me the high and mighty, moral paragon, down-on-your-luck professional athlete tales of self-sacrifice and righteousness and sticking up for the workin' man.

AlienLanes82 is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 10:05 PM
  #857
Leaf_Crazy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,615
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Right conclusion, wrong reasoning.

How much money each individual has to live on is totally irrelevant. Almost everybody at the table will never have to work again if they don't want to.

What's relevant is how much money each side loses by cancelling games. NHL makes $120M/year, net. Players makes $1.9B/year.

If the NHL made money off the game, they'd be saying let's get back on the ice, even if we have to pay a little bit more than we think is right! But they don't. So they're willing to cancel games almost indefinitely - makes no difference to them, they're not losing anything that gave them anything substantial. Put it this way: the difference between the last two offers made was ~$500M, for all five years. The players almost certainly lost that much when November was cancelled, meaning even if the NHL comes and takes their last offer tomorrow, they've already screwed themselves out of money. The NHL owners, on the other hand, would have to cancel 4 consecutive seasons before they would screw themselves out of $500M.

Which side do you think will crack first? The side losing $500M in 25 games, or the side making $500M in four years?
This might be the best post I've seen since the lockout started.

Leaf_Crazy is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 10:12 PM
  #858
Krishna
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,011
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeety mcjeet View Post
Is it possible that at some point the NHL decides that ridding themselves of the Fehr brothers is the number one priority?
This has probably already gone through their heads. No it's just a time of when the NHLPA realizes it

__________________
Krishna is online now  
Old
10-26-2012, 10:13 PM
  #859
Whydidijoin*
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,812
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeLH View Post
Sure they were. But then we're at a point were a business as a whole, in big difference to 8 years ago, makes profit and not losses. So to me there's no need to cut existing contracts, especially as the players are willing to accept a smaller HRR share than before.
A multi-billion dollar business making $100 million a year is not sustainable, especially when those profits come from a small number of divisions in that company, with many losing money.

In the real world, that leads to a bunch of jobs being cut. I doubt the NHLPA would like that.

Existing contracts are also not being cut. They always fluctuated, and they always were dependent on whatever CBA was in place at the time.

The players are not really accepting a smaller share. It is only a smaller share if the league grew at a rate that was unsustainable even before this mess. Basically, the NHLPA is only willing to accept a smaller share if that smaller share means a raise.

Whydidijoin* is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 10:15 PM
  #860
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
 
CpatainCanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,700
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Right conclusion, wrong reasoning.

How much money each individual has to live on is totally irrelevant. Almost everybody at the table will never have to work again if they don't want to.

What's relevant is how much money each side loses by cancelling games. NHL makes $120M/year, net. Players makes $1.9B/year.

If the NHL made money off the game, they'd be saying let's get back on the ice, even if we have to pay a little bit more than we think is right! But they don't. So they're willing to cancel games almost indefinitely - makes no difference to them, they're not losing anything that gave them anything substantial. Put it this way: the difference between the last two offers made was ~$500M, for all five years. The players almost certainly lost that much when November was cancelled, meaning even if the NHL comes and takes their last offer tomorrow, they've already screwed themselves out of money. The NHL owners, on the other hand, would have to cancel 4 consecutive seasons before they would screw themselves out of $500M.

Which side do you think will crack first? The side losing $500M in 25 games, or the side making $500M in four years?
The NHL would be making a lot more than 120 million/year if they had made a deal near a 50/50 split.

CpatainCanuck is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 10:18 PM
  #861
onlyalad
Registered User
 
onlyalad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 4,271
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flamingo View Post
You're kidding yourself if you think the players and their agents weren't aware of the pending CBA negotiations and possible implications.
Agree with this.
By saying the players and agents were unaware that the NHL was going to try to lower the percentage of HHR is to call those players unaware of the business side of hockey.

I would love to support the players more but it seems like the only thing we hear is the foolish things they say. Anyone with 3/4ths of a brain knew when the NBA and NFL went 50/50 and when the league's first offer was 43% the goal was 50/50. The NHLPA had to know, Fehr, being the top negotiator he is, had to know. So far the NHLPA has stalled, throw out crazy ideas, and blamed the owners for everything and until the NHLPA puts forth a 57.54,50,50,50 deal with some ruling to prevent 15 year deals for 35 year old players we are doomed to watch basketball and poker.

I don't care who win or loses. It won't change the price of tickets or make the nachos fresher. I just want to talk about how my favorite team got to remove the big cloud that has hung over its head for 45 years and instead of enjoying the year I get to read how owners and players negotiate like 7 year old kids

onlyalad is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 10:18 PM
  #862
Ragamuffin Gunner
Lost in The Flood
 
Ragamuffin Gunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 15,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeLH View Post
That was in interesting point from the first day on when those many contracts before the end of the old CBA were signed. I think that Suter is making a good point. To me that wasn't negotiation in good faith if the owners thought on the big contracts: 'oh well, why not 5 million more, we'll roll them back anyways' ...
And the players were totally like "no don't give me 5M more!" And they totally had no idea the CBA was expiring and there would be changes made.

Ragamuffin Gunner is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 10:25 PM
  #863
Ragamuffin Gunner
Lost in The Flood
 
Ragamuffin Gunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 15,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Right conclusion, wrong reasoning.

How much money each individual has to live on is totally irrelevant. Almost everybody at the table will never have to work again if they don't want to.

What's relevant is how much money each side loses by cancelling games. NHL makes $120M/year, net. Players makes $1.9B/year.

If the NHL made money off the game, they'd be saying let's get back on the ice, even if we have to pay a little bit more than we think is right! But they don't. So they're willing to cancel games almost indefinitely - makes no difference to them, they're not losing anything that gave them anything substantial. Put it this way: the difference between the last two offers made was ~$500M, for all five years. The players almost certainly lost that much when November was cancelled, meaning even if the NHL comes and takes their last offer tomorrow, they've already screwed themselves out of money. The NHL owners, on the other hand, would have to cancel 4 consecutive seasons before they would screw themselves out of $500M.

Which side do you think will crack first? The side losing $500M in 25 games, or the side making $500M in four years?
This notion is wrong. Many players will be in financial trouble with one lost season, let alone never working again.

These players aren't very smart with their money. You give any 20 year old 5 million dollars and he doesn't put it in the bank. He buys his parents a new house, himself a new house and new car and all his buddies new iPhones.

You should watch ESPNs 30 for 30 "Broke".


Last edited by Ragamuffin Gunner: 10-26-2012 at 10:46 PM.
Ragamuffin Gunner is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 10:32 PM
  #864
Lacaar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeLH View Post
That was in interesting point from the first day on when those many contracts before the end of the old CBA were signed. I think that Suter is making a good point. To me that wasn't negotiation in good faith if the owners thought on the big contracts: 'oh well, why not 5 million more, we'll roll them back anyways' ...
It wasn't the owner thinking he will just get it back. It was the agent saying 5 mil more or my client goes to team b.

You think Leopold paid Souter and praise that much because he thought he'd get some back?

I think he paid that much because that's what was needed to get the player.

It's the players that act two faced. They literally ransom themselves to the highest bidder then toss it right back into the face of the owner.

It's no secret a player calls Out Bettman or THE owners. suter doesn't have the balls to call out Leopold by name? Be a man and honor your contract is the players line.

Well Suter be a man and say that to your bosses face and stop hiding behind Bettman, the media, etc.

Lacaar is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 10:39 PM
  #865
ps241
Drunken rant!
 
ps241's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,383
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragamuffin Gunner View Post
This noting is wrong. Many players will be in financial trouble with one lost season, let alone never working again.

These players aren't very smart with their money. You give any 20 year old 5 million dollars and he doesn't put it in the bank. He buys his parents a new house, himself a new house and new car and all his buddies new iPhones.

You should watch ESPNs 30 for 30 "Broke".
I will try to PVR Broke......what was the overview?

Wayne chrebet former undrafted wide receiver in the NFL is now into wealth Managment and when being interviewed on Sirius NFL network by Ross Tucker Wayne mentioned that 70% of former NFL players file for bankruptcy at some point.

Proves the old adage that its not what you make that counts, it what you spend.

ps241 is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 10:41 PM
  #866
Krishna
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,011
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps241 View Post
I will try to PVR Broke......what was the overview?

Wayne chrebet former undrafted wide receiver in the NFL is now into wealth Managment and when being interviewed on Sirius NFL network by Ross Tucker Wayne mentioned that 70% of former NFL players file for bankruptcy at some point.

Proves the old adage that its not what you make that counts, it what you spend.
Film Summary
According to a 2009 Sports Illustrated article, 60 percent of former NBA players are broke within five years of retirement. By the time they have been retired for two years, 78% of former NFL players have gone bankrupt or are under financial stress. Sucked into bad investments, stalked by freeloaders, saddled with medical problems, and naturally prone to showing off, many pro athletes get shocked by harsh economic realities after years of living the high life. Drawing surprisingly vulnerable confessions from retired stars like Keith McCants, Bernie Kosar and Andre Rison, as well as Marvin Miller, the former executive director of the MLB Players Association, this fascinating documentary digs into the psychology of men whose competitive nature can carry them to victory on the field and ruin off it.

Director Billy Corben (The U, Cocaine Cowboys, Limelight) paints a complex picture of the many forces that drain athletes' bank accounts, placing some of the blame on the culture at large while still holding these giants accountable for their own hubris. A story of the dark side of success, "Broke," is an allegory for the financial woes haunting economies and individuals all over the world.

Krishna is online now  
Old
10-26-2012, 10:58 PM
  #867
wilty00
Registered User
 
wilty00's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Kelowna/Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,259
vCash: 1004
Suprised there hasn't been more uproar from the Roy tweet considering the context and how bad Dan Ellis got it for his little adventure.

wilty00 is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 10:59 PM
  #868
Krishna
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,011
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilty00 View Post
Suprised there hasn't been more uproar from the Roy tweet considering the context and how bad Dan Ellis got it for his little adventure.
Are you talking about his tweet talking about a fair deal for the players that came after he posted a picture of his porsche?

Krishna is online now  
Old
10-26-2012, 11:13 PM
  #869
Flamingo
Registered User
 
Flamingo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 3,409
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
Are you talking about his tweet talking about a fair deal for the players that came after he posted a picture of his porsche?
Everyone should tweet to players: I want you to get a fair deal. But your PA is being rideeeeeculous.

Flamingo is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 11:38 PM
  #870
HookKing
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SidTheKid8787 View Post
Ryan Suter weighs in:

http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/85...ntracts-afford

Suter is now wondering if those huge contracts were negotiated in good faith.

"From what's going on right now? Yes. Definitely," Suter told ESPN The Magazine. "I haven't done any interviews. I haven't said anything, but yeah, it's disappointing that the owners, they sign all these guys and some guys were signed within the last week before the CBA was up. Now, they're trying to go back on their word. It's frustrating, disappointing. It doesn't seem like that's the way you operate a relationship or business."

"It's disappointing. If you can't afford to (sign contracts) then you shouldn't do it," Suter said. "(Leipold) signed us to contracts. At the time he said everything was fine. Yeah, it's disappointing. A couple months before, everything is fine, and now they want to take money out of our contracts that we already signed."

As part of their identical contracts, both Suter and Parise received $10 million signing bonuses that were protected from the lockout.

He's in Chicago to participate in a charity game between the members of the 2010 Chicago Blackhawks and All-Stars to raise money for the Ronald McDonald House.

He said hanging out with the players before the charity game and getting ready to play in front of fans are just reminders of what the players are missing.

"We're close to November," Suter said. "Why can't we get something done? I know we're willing to negotiate. We've always been willing. You just need someone to talk to."
So let me get this straight, he got 10m guaranteed because the owners were planning to screw him over? Uh no...he's just covering his hindquarters flapping in the breeze with the other players.

HookKing is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 11:43 PM
  #871
Krishna
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,011
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by SidTheKid8787 View Post
Ryan Suter weighs in:

http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/85...ntracts-afford

Suter is now wondering if those huge contracts were negotiated in good faith.

"From what's going on right now? Yes. Definitely," Suter told ESPN The Magazine. "I haven't done any interviews. I haven't said anything, but yeah, it's disappointing that the owners, they sign all these guys and some guys were signed within the last week before the CBA was up. Now, they're trying to go back on their word. It's frustrating, disappointing. It doesn't seem like that's the way you operate a relationship or business."

"It's disappointing. If you can't afford to (sign contracts) then you shouldn't do it," Suter said. "(Leipold) signed us to contracts. At the time he said everything was fine. Yeah, it's disappointing. A couple months before, everything is fine, and now they want to take money out of our contracts that we already signed."

As part of their identical contracts, both Suter and Parise received $10 million signing bonuses that were protected from the lockout.

He's in Chicago to participate in a charity game between the members of the 2010 Chicago Blackhawks and All-Stars to raise money for the Ronald McDonald House.

He said hanging out with the players before the charity game and getting ready to play in front of fans are just reminders of what the players are missing.

"We're close to November," Suter said. "Why can't we get something done? I know we're willing to negotiate. We've always been willing. You just need someone to talk to."
Negotiate?
Taking months to finally meet with the NHLPA sure sounds like they want to negotiate.
Ignoring all of the NHL's proposals? Sure sounds like they want to meet.
Not presenting a linked cap proposal?

So much negotiating

Krishna is online now  
Old
10-27-2012, 12:15 AM
  #872
SuperUnknown
Registered User
 
SuperUnknown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,513
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SidTheKid8787 View Post
Ryan Suter weighs in:

http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/85...ntracts-afford

Suter is now wondering if those huge contracts were negotiated in good faith.

"From what's going on right now? Yes. Definitely," Suter told ESPN The Magazine. "I haven't done any interviews. I haven't said anything, but yeah, it's disappointing that the owners, they sign all these guys and some guys were signed within the last week before the CBA was up. Now, they're trying to go back on their word. It's frustrating, disappointing. It doesn't seem like that's the way you operate a relationship or business."
I wonder if anyone told Suter that if he had signed the NHL offer last week, he would have lost less than $2M from his total deal yet by sitting out he's going to lose at least $7M (+ eventual rollback as with a missed season it will be inevitable).

SuperUnknown is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 12:39 AM
  #873
nowhereman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,434
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haj View Post
Put yourself in his shoes. What would you think if your boss was asking you to take a 20% pay cut ?

The amount of money he makes/made does not invalidate his opinion.
You're totally missing the point. Krys Barch has every right in the world to be pissed off at the fact that the owners want him to take a paycut. That's HIS finances they're cutting into. No matter how much money you make, there's nothing wrong with being miffed at a hit to the pocketbook.

But he's a damn fool if he thinks people will have anything but disdain for his comments regarding his doubt on how he's going to "conquer tomorrow" and care for his family. He's a drama queen, insulting your average Joe Citizen who really does have to work for the rest of his/her life. Either he's incredibly naive or his mathematical skills fail to measure up to a first grade level. Little over a handful of players, on each team, make under a million dollars a year and most of those guys still mange to carve out a decent enough NHL career.

He asserted that 75% of his peers will have to work for the next 50 years of their lives (oh, no... work). Yet, last year, sixteen players on the Dallas Stars roster made over a million dollars a year. Every single one of those players was an NHL regular, almost all of them having played in excess of five years. Half of those players made over 3 million per season.

Unless these clowns are driving around in 24K gold-plated Lambos, they won't need to take a job slinging hash at Tim Hortons when they retire.

nowhereman is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 12:41 AM
  #874
CN_paladin
Registered User
 
CN_paladin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westeros
Posts: 2,649
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
Are you talking about his tweet talking about a fair deal for the players that came after he posted a picture of his porsche?
His much more expensive Ferrari you mean!

CN_paladin is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 12:55 AM
  #875
Krishna
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,011
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by CN_paladin View Post
His much more expensive Ferrari you mean!
Possibly. I'm not really a fan of cars :p

Krishna 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 03:35 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.