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, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

A Bad Lawyer Can Drag A Case For Years, A Good Lawyer Even Longer (CBA/Lockout) XXVI

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-12-2012, 01:01 AM
  #251
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 32,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
How can you read that quote and come to the conclusion you do? Bizarre.

The league has made clear what their concerns are and they need to be addressed. Mainly getting rid of the cap circumventing contracts and that second contracts are too big. Daly says several times that there is flexibility around how that can be done. Far from the picture Fehr is painting.

They don't need the restrictions.

If the players can ONLY get 50%, why does the league care how they divide it up between them?


What are their concerns, Freudian?

(I understand the the 5% variance.)

Fugu is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 01:06 AM
  #252
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 32,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
I do think it's rather transparent what Fehr is doing. Every time he wants to force the NHL to make concessions, he claims that they're demanding total subservience from the players. That obviously riles the players up and just feeds into the ongoing story line that the NHL is being intransigent.
I think what's transparent is that every time the league puts out something in a proposal (which has always been about TAKING something the players had), Daly spins it as the PA not being willing to "meet them".


Quote:
Originally Posted by rdawg1234 View Post
I 100% dont think the PA will accept any arbitration or UFA changes and they shouldn't. Those changes go just a little too far IMO.

however contract limits are the important one, 8-10 year limits + the 5-10% yearly variance is the key in all this. Arbitration and UFA stuff is just a bonus for the owners and I'm hoping they come off that stance once the other stuff is agreed too. I also hope the PA isnt too firm on NOT having any kind of limits on contracts though, as this change would benefit the league alot in a few ways.
I personally don't see why the NHL wants any of these items other than the 5% variance, which admittedly is the NHL's attempt to plug the cap circumventing contracts.

On the other hand, they could just make each year's contract value be the cap hit, right, and do away with the AAV. If we're honest, this benefits the rich teams who like to frontload, and makes a bit of a sham out of the cap ceiling in actual dollars spent per year.

Fugu is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 01:06 AM
  #253
Lard_Lad
Registered User
 
Lard_Lad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Kelowna
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,678
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I don't recall the earlier suggestions from Fehr. I do believe that when it came up in an NHLPA proposal, it was an IGF controlled by Bettman, iirc.
Here's Klein talking about it in August (second and third paragraph from the bottom is where it's specified Bettman wouldn't have complete control, in contrast to Selig and the baseball fund): http://slapshot.blogs.nytimes.com/20...y-growth-fund/

I wouldn't normally read that much into it, but with both stories coming from the same writer (and that writer being Klein, who has a pretty good grasp of hockey business issues), it looks like there was movement away from the old position.

Lard_Lad is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 01:10 AM
  #254
VeteranNetPresence
Disco Super Fly.
 
VeteranNetPresence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
There you go again.


Here's a more recent report from the NYT link:
under my interpretation, (3MM*30 teams*length of the next CBA) would likely put it into the 600MM realm what lebrun is talking about

VeteranNetPresence is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 01:11 AM
  #255
Freudian
Slightly overpaid
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 34,572
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
They don't need the restrictions.

If the players can ONLY get 50%, why does the league care how they divide it up between them?


What are their concerns, Freudian?

(I understand the the 5% variance.)
Like I said, cap circumvention contracts and like Daly says "allocating more dollars to established players". I assume it's the rich second contracts he refers to since he says teams are forced to do talent assessments too early in a players career.

source

Obviously not all of the things in NHLs contract proposals are needed to fix these things. Combine that with Daly emphasizing that NHLs primary concern is addressing these problems and saying there is flexibility around how you do it and it doesn't seem at all like the ultimatum Fehr claims it is.

I think the contracting thing is issue B and the finances is issue A and no real negotiating around them will happen until the economics is dealt with. I'd be very surprised to see NHL to go war over all their contracting proposals once everything is said and done.

Freudian is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 01:13 AM
  #256
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 32,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lard_Lad View Post
Here's Klein talking about it in August (second and third paragraph from the bottom is where it's specified Bettman wouldn't have complete control, in contrast to Selig and the baseball fund): http://slapshot.blogs.nytimes.com/20...y-growth-fund/

I wouldn't normally read that much into it, but with both stories coming from the same writer (and that writer being Klein, who has a pretty good grasp of hockey business issues), it looks like there was movement away from the old position.

Thanks for digging up the link. From there:
“Part of the enhanced revenue-sharing would be the creation of what we have called the Industry Growth Fund, which would put $100 million a year to go directly to the assistance of teams that need it,” Fehr said Friday.
“There would be some discretion as to which teams and what amounts and how they would be done,” Fehr continued. “A large part of that discretion, under our proposal, would be vested in the commissioner’s office.”


You seemed to find that the latest mention of it indicated a movement away from Bettman controlling the fund, but the NYT article says:

The system will include a small fund, similar to baseball’s industry growth fund, that Bettman can specially earmark for the neediest franchises — presumably teams like Phoenix, the Islanders, Columbus and Florida.



Thus I don't believe there was a material change??

Fugu is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 01:15 AM
  #257
bishop12
Ovyously
 
bishop12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,765
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SidTheKid8787 View Post
The good news is, theres still time.
No matter if Don wants a season or not, his constituents may want one at the full season cut off point. The prospect of getting $0 this year makes the "it's not about the money, it's about the principle" stance most players have erode or completely erase at that point.

Deal was done in '94 in Jan.
Season was cancelled in '05 in Feb.
Don't you see a trend here? These players aren't going to be bent over the barrel every couple years just cause they've gotta save their hide for one season.

bishop12 is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 01:18 AM
  #258
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 32,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VeteranNetPresence View Post
under my interpretation, (3MM*30 teams*length of the next CBA) would likely put it into the 600MM realm what lebrun is talking about
I know he threw some numbers out, but today's reports all indicate that both sides feel they're much closer on this matter. I don't believe those numbers are relevant at this point.

They may never have been relevant at all. People were guessing at what it meant, and several corrections have come up that stated the PA was working on a framework, and then the numbers, prorated, would be plugged in. That has been verified by later reports.





Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
Like I said, cap circumvention contracts and like Daly says "allocating more dollars to established players". I assume it's the rich second contracts he refers to since he says teams are forced to do talent assessments too early in a players career.

source

Obviously not all of the things in NHLs contract proposals are needed to fix these things. Combine that with Daly emphasizing that NHLs primary concern is addressing these problems and saying there is flexibility around how you do it and it doesn't seem at all like the ultimatum Fehr claims it is.

I think the contracting thing is issue B and the finances is issue A and no real negotiating around them will happen until the economics is dealt with. I'd be very surprised to see NHL to go war over all their contracting proposals once everything is said and done.
I hope you're right, that the NHL will give ground on these items. Like I said, they really don't need most of them. However, we have Daly quoted a few times, but one cannot overlook that other sources have confirmed what Fehr relayed per the reporters making these claims, that Bettman (not Daly) said the league wouldn't budge until the other issues were accepted.

Fugu is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 01:18 AM
  #259
meedle
Registered User
 
meedle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 4,210
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
Like I said, cap circumvention contracts and like Daly says "allocating more dollars to established players". I assume it's the rich second contracts he refers to since he says teams are forced to do talent assessments too early in a players career.

source

Obviously not all of the things in NHLs contract proposals are needed to fix these things. Combine that with Daly emphasizing that NHLs primary concern is addressing these problems and saying there is flexibility around how you do it and it doesn't seem at all like the ultimatum Fehr claims it is.

I think the contracting thing is issue B and the finances is issue A and no real negotiating around them will happen until the economics is dealt with. I'd be very surprised to see NHL to go war over all their contracting proposals once everything is said and done.
As was stated its the 2nd contract thats concerning to the owners. Its hard to build a contender with paying young guys so much. Look at Chicago, they had to pay all those young guys and look how many guys got traded/left cause they couldn't afford them. They haven't been the same team ever since really.

meedle is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 01:19 AM
  #260
bishop12
Ovyously
 
bishop12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,765
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragamuffin Gunner View Post
Because it's usually the third year of an ELC where the player produced the numbers to get the big contracts.
So pay the guy what he's worth...period. If another team wants to overpay an RFA..take the picks..and let him be. The owners are ****ing OTL.

bishop12 is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 01:22 AM
  #261
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 32,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by meedle View Post
As was stated its the 2nd contract thats concerning to the owners. Its hard to build a contender with paying young guys so much. Look at Chicago, they had to pay all those young guys and look how many guys got traded/left cause they couldn't afford them. They haven't been the same team ever since really.

I don't believe that's what got Chicago into trouble. They had two very large UFA contracts (Campbell, and then added Hossa), along with perhaps overpaying Huet significantly.

THEN they botched their qualifying offers to their RFAs.

Fugu is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 01:32 AM
  #262
Freudian
Slightly overpaid
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 34,572
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by mind_the_gap View Post
So pay the guy what he's worth...period. If another team wants to overpay an RFA..take the picks..and let him be. The owners are ****ing OTL.
I agree. I don't think a situation with regards to second contracts where players had very little leverage and had to take what was offered is a great thing. Many of the young players are so well prepared for NHL hockey at 19-20 that it's hard to argue they don't deserve to be well paid for it when they are 21-22.

I don't think allocating money from RFAs to UFAs is needed. I'd rather have young stars make money than UFAs making way too much money.

Freudian is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 01:36 AM
  #263
meedle
Registered User
 
meedle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 4,210
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I don't believe that's what got Chicago into trouble. They had two very large UFA contracts (Campbell, and then added Hossa), along with perhaps overpaying Huet significantly.

THEN they botched their qualifying offers to their RFAs.
Campbell was resigned in 08-09, Hossa signed in 09-10, They won the cup in 09-10, On Dec 9/09 Toews and Kane were comin off ELC and both signed 5yr 31.5. and Keith signed 13yr/72mil and after the season they basically traded/ blew up the team cause they couldnt afford them under the cap. Ladd, buff went to atlanta, versteeg went to toronto, that goalie went to sj, etc etc

meedle is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 01:38 AM
  #264
rdawg1234
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by meedle View Post
Campbell was resigned in 08-09, Hossa signed in 09-10, They won the cup in 09-10, On Dec 9/09 Toews and Kane were comin off ELC and both signed 5yr 31.5. and Keith signed 13yr/72mil and after the season they basically traded/ blew up the team cause they couldnt afford them under the cap. Ladd, buff went to atlanta, versteeg went to toronto, that goalie went to sj, etc etc
Definitely sad, that's an all-star team there, team is still great, but not what it used to be.

Still though, I'm not sure new rules would even change that from happening, it would help, but chicago's problems were just bound to happen.

rdawg1234 is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 01:43 AM
  #265
Mantha Poodoo
Playoff Beard
 
Mantha Poodoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,916
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdawg1234 View Post
Why quote only fehr when daly said they budged/agreed on 14 of 17 issues right after Fehr made that statement?
We have no idea what those issues are.

Quote:
This "they are draconian and won't budge on any issue" has been false every single time. It's all media spin by the PA.
That may well be the case. We don't know if the NHL has budged on anything regarding contracts/players rights. The "14/17 issues" could very well be things that both sides more or less agreed to from the get go and just had to iron out details.

Quote:
I'm sure the NHL is quite firm on getting most of these contract issues, but how willing is the PA to budge on any of them?
Probably not very, seeing as they're already acquiescing to give up 12% of their chunk for nothing.

Quote:
If the NHL's goal is to meet in the middle on the issues but the PA wants to simply keep all old rules, how are they going to agree on anything.
This one is worthy of bolding. The NHL isn't meeting on the middle of anything except revenue sharing so far. The old CBA is the middle from the position of a strong negotiator. Only a weak negotiator would consider half of an opponent's initial demands to be a middle. Everything the owners are seeking is a concession from the players, not a middle. Likewise, if the players were to ask for, say, less RFA years, that would be a concession on the behalf of the owners.

Quote:
And I cant currently find the quote, but I believe daly or one of the league representatives did say that once make-whole/HRR was figured out, that contract issues could be moved on a bit.
This part of things has been very unclear from both sides. Lots of conflicting statements and I'm not particularly inclined to believe either side fully.


Last edited by Mantha Poodoo: 11-12-2012 at 01:46 AM. Reason: I can't type the word "quote". Or "owners".
Mantha Poodoo is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 01:43 AM
  #266
meedle
Registered User
 
meedle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 4,210
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdawg1234 View Post
Definitely sad, that's an all-star team there, team is still great, but not what it used to be.

Still though, I'm not sure new rules would even change that from happening, it would help, but chicago's problems were just bound to happen.
I'm just stating why its needed. That 2nd contract is a killer to payroll when your competing. The UFA I can say it's not needed but understand why both sides want it. For the owners you keep the player as an asset for another year. Its pretty sad for a fan base when you get to the point where you are competing and then you have to turn around and trade / let go of pieces cause you can't fit it under the cap.

meedle is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 02:03 AM
  #267
OGBobbyFarnham
Registered User
 
OGBobbyFarnham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 10,114
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wheeled Winger View Post
This part of things has been very unclear from both sides. Lots of conflicting statements and I'm not particularly inclined to believe either side fully.
Re:"If core economics is put to bed, contracting rights are negotiable"

This statement comes from Lebrun and other media and so far i've only heard Fehr wanting to bring it up and Bettman telling him it's a no go zone. Today Bettman was even quoted as saying "the give and take game is over".

It's pretty clear Bettman and the owners are frustrated. It's almost as if owners and players backed by Fehr and Bettman have to clash like rivals on the playground before they can play nice. Ever see those russian soccer/gang fight deelios? Yea, one of those.


Last edited by OGBobbyFarnham: 11-12-2012 at 02:30 AM.
OGBobbyFarnham is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 02:26 AM
  #268
MapleLeafsFan4Ever
Go Leafs Go
 
MapleLeafsFan4Ever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,575
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I don't believe that's what got Chicago into trouble. They had two very large UFA contracts (Campbell, and then added Hossa), along with perhaps overpaying Huet significantly.

THEN they botched their qualifying offers to their RFAs.
Plus at that time they knew eventually the RFA deals for Towes and Kane would be finished, so they needed the cap space to eventually re-sign them.

MapleLeafsFan4Ever is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 02:41 AM
  #269
helicecopter
Registered User
 
helicecopter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: give me higher shots
Posts: 8,165
vCash: 500
the league eventually giving back on several of those contracts demands is as obvious as the NHLPA aknowledging whatever is agreed on will have to be pro-rated under the lockout terms.

Just more spins and tactics (not like Daly is even making a mistery of it).. YAWN

helicecopter is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 03:04 AM
  #270
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 19,017
vCash: 500
Put in any kind of perspective, the NHL and the PA are extremely close on the core economic issues. The diffrence over the term of a new CBA amounts to like, I don't know, what 10 rounds of regular season hockey? If the player share is 1.6b. 1/8 (or like 10 of 82 rounds of hockey) of that is 200m.

The NHL get what they want in the core economic issues. They wanted 50/50. They get 50/50. But not from y1. But very few could realistically have expected that.

The 5% issue is as much a PA issue as a NHL issue. If the PA could write their own CBA, in a cap environment, why would the majority of memembers want a system in which a few basically cheats the other members? The money made in additional to the AAV on a frontloaded contract is basically recovered by the league through escrow from all members.

28/8 and later arbitration is definitely a luxury problem for the league as a whole, but, I am sure these issues are pushed for really hard by a small but determined group of owners. And who would those owners be?

Take Edmonton for example. A great team will be able to keep a great roster as long as they are great basically. Pittsburg could have been situated in Columbus, but they would still have been attractive if having won a cup and been a look to be a contender year after year. Playing on that team, no matter where its located, is attractive. Pittsburgh hit jackpot with Sid and Evg. For every Pittsburgh there is a Atlanta. Atleast one. With 7/25, and if you get good players but maybe not a Sid or Malkin, you have a relatively small window to contend. These players will start to cost money pretty soon, and if you face adversity all of a sudden you start to loose your core when they hit 25 y/o...

So it seems obvious that teams that are in the position of EDM right now, or envisions to go down that road in the near future, put it forth to Bettman as basically a deal breaker in the BOG vote that Bettman get something for them on these issues.

The PA shouldn't underestimate the impact of the above. IE, yes, its a luxury problem for the league as a whole and from the PA's point of view, it does really limit their options. Its a big issue for them. But, while its a luxury problem for the league as a whole Bettman must get a deal that is accepted by whatever majority he needs and in that equation this could be a diffrencemaker...

Ola is online now  
Old
11-12-2012, 03:12 AM
  #271
albator71
Registered User
 
albator71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,498
vCash: 500
Players want their money, owners want their money but what will the fans get out of all this? A huge blue sign on the ice saying "thank you fans".

I hope the HRR shrunk to $2B next season that will teach them, I hope the the attendance drops by at least 30% that will teach them.

You'll excuse me but I have no sympathy for the players nor for the owners they're acting like a bunch of spoiled brats, which they are.

I hope that all the fans around the NHL take a stand and stays away from the 30 NHL arenas. I want the players and owners to stop taking us from granted.

albator71 is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 03:42 AM
  #272
Ugene Malkin
Hello Mr. Andersen
 
Ugene Malkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 24,308
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by albator71 View Post
Players want their money, owners want their money but what will the fans get out of all this? A huge blue sign on the ice saying "thank you fans".

I hope the HRR shrunk to $2B next season that will teach them, I hope the the attendance drops by at least 30% that will teach them.

You'll excuse me but I have no sympathy for the players nor for the owners they're acting like a bunch of spoiled brats, which they are.

I hope that all the fans around the NHL take a stand and stays away from the 30 NHL arenas. I want the players and owners to stop taking us from granted.
I think you'll get your wish, but unfortunately not enough will take on the cause because, they miss their game. I understand still going to games/watching games, but not spending anything beyond that is enough to get to that goal.

Bleeding us dry is not the answer.

Ugene Malkin is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 03:46 AM
  #273
W75
Wegistewed Usew
 
W75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 4,722
vCash: 626
Ok, I've made my decision. Because even one single representative can give so mixed, delusive and schizophrenic comments even in one single sentence.. I've got to choose the side now. And after that I don't use any intelligence nor any common sense.. no criticism, no suspicions.. I'l take everything what this chosen person is ever going to say ..as a truth. Why? Because it's easy. I'm done with this thinking and reading and analyzing world economics issues and how this kind of situations actually go at normal workplaces and companies and what is reasonable for everyone etc etc..

I'll be a believer! Now it's only tough job to choose who is the One I'm gonna follow!?

Mr. Fehr? nah, he seems to me.. and sounds like... I don't know.. insincere and self-satisfied.

The other Fehr? Don't know much. Someone told he's not that bad, but he's still a Fehr. Or should I say fehr.

Bettman? Nooo, don't think so. Too much politician, especially reminds me of one very contradictory Italian decision-maker. Can't give my life to his hands.

Daly? Yeah. He seems like level-headed, his comments sounds appropriate, says the things just like they are, things. I don't know if he's fooling me, but I don't care. He does it well. It's official. Bill Daly is my new Master and I will never question him. So long sense and thinking! Mr Daly, I'm all Yours, let me be your humble servant.

W75 is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 05:22 AM
  #274
IceDaddy
24 and Counting
 
IceDaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,973
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CN_paladin View Post
Fehr's track record of 6 work stoppages indicate otherwise.

Unless Fehr gets fired, there simply won't be a season guys.

I am starting to think he is stalling to go after the cap

IceDaddy is offline  
Old
11-12-2012, 05:28 AM
  #275
Grannys
Registered User
 
Grannys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: London, UK
Country: Finland
Posts: 3,080
vCash: 500
Just watched all the 24/7 episodes over the weekend and man oh man how I freaking miss hockey. Especially when the weather starts getting cold, all you wanna do is cozy up by the TV and watch some games. By now we should have a good idea of which teams will struggle to make a dent this season and which teams might be looking at a ticket to the playoffs. Which players pick up where they left off, which players fall from grace and what new names we can add to the top scoring sheets.... well as it turns out we have none of that...

Every day that goes by, I raise a giant middle finger to the league, the PA and everyone else responsible for this mess that is leaving us with no hockey.

Grannys 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 09:00 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.