Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
PASabreFan

If fans could fire an owner, would you fire Terry?

Would you fire Terry?  

72 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you fire Terry?

    • Yes
      21
    • No
      51


Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Sabel79 said:

The OP has an axe to grind.  In fact, it’s been ground past the hilt and I expect he’s lost a few fingers, thus making him angrier.  🤷🏻‍♂️ 

I'm not angry anymore. Comfortably numb. Lots of you were angrier at Phil, Vlad, Scandy etc. than I was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, nfreeman said:

Are the new owners from fantasy land contractually obligated not only to keep the team in Buffalo but also to throw money at the team the way TP has?

It continues to amaze me that the OP does not understand how freaking miraculous it was that the heavens opened up and gave us a stinking rich owner for BOTH of our teams who wants to win, doesn’t care what it costs and has no interest in moving the teams.

This free stuff isn’t enough!  Give me more!  Do more for me!

What I'm asking for is too much to ask? Is it greedy? Just be smart. Get out of the way. You coached kids in Olean. Wonderful. You don't know the game. Act like the fan you claimed to be and make winning, not your ego, priority one. None of us would own this team the way he has, and Terry's just a poster here. One whose posts would get endless eye rolls.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SDS said:

What observations have you made the past two years? Anything specific?

Fair question. I haven't created or kept a note in my phone over time. Maybe I should have. It's an impression that's slowly settled in with me. It's been based on a lot of anecdotal things, here and there. The big one, for sure, is how he talked about McDermott as a faith-based person when explaining why he thinks he'll be a good coach. But there've been many others. He liked Gaustad in 2011. Why? It was the hand shake and direct look in the eyes. Which, fine. Gaustad was a useful NHL player. Years later, Terry was intimately involved in targeting Josh Allen. He really, really likes the kid. Why? That's less clear. But I think of the Gaustad approval in that regard. Housley as a coach was hailed as a HOF player. Wut? Add in those comments he reportedly made at the NFL owners' meeting about the Kaepernick (sp?) stuff.

This goes to the business side as well. Kim's brother has a key role in the creative works of PSE.

I could create a larger inventory, I'm sure; I just lack the time to do so.

And not for nothing, in just listening to him speak ... I get the clear sense that he's no sharp tack.

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

I understand the dissatisfaction with with the results.  I do think though that evaluation of owners requires a much longer horizon than evaluation of coaches or players.  I think all of his hiring decisions have made sense on paper, and all arose out of a desire to improve the team.  

The biggest reason the Sabres are where they are was the idiotic decision to tank for Eichel, which at least half, and probably more, of the fan base and commentariat supported.  

My point is that it’s not like he’s been hiring his cousin who got laid off at the gas station to be the GM or his favorite waitress at the diner to be the coach (although I guess he did marry her and then make her team president, so...)

8 years seems like a fair sample size. And I won't litigate the tank here. I've never had any interest in doing so.

11 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Botterill, the one hire he made it clear he was owning after saying he didn't have much to do with hiring Murray, is already halfway out the door because of a bad coaching hire and poor roster construction.

I still appreciate that JBOT is more of an asset-manager than a hard-boiled scout. I think that's forward thinking on the Pegulas' part.

4 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Watch the clip of Briere's overtime goal in Game 6 against the Canes and tell me that guy with his hands on his head didn't care. Not a glass of Merlot in sight.

Fair.

  • Thanks (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Smell, you forgot that Terry thinks one of the biggest things Botterill has going for him is that he's the only three-time World Junior gold medal winner alive on the face of the earth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, nfreeman said:

Well, by assuming that you can replace him with another wealthy and committed owner (which were not assumed in the OP, by the way) you’ve effectively assumed away the issue.

For me, it’s not just that he’s kept the teams in Buffalo.  It’s that he’s thrown money at them in a way that no Buffalo owner ever has and no one else is likely to do ever again as it is an economically irrational move.  Not to mention pouring money into developing downtown Buffalo (they weren’t exactly lining up to do that either), not extorting a bunch of money out of the city and generally being a fundamentally decent guy.

 

I understand the dissatisfaction with with the results.  I do think though that evaluation of owners requires a much longer horizon than evaluation of coaches or players.  I think all of his hiring decisions have made sense on paper, and all arose out of a desire to improve the team.  

The biggest reason the Sabres are where they are was the idiotic decision to tank for Eichel, which at least half, and probably more, of the fan base and commentariat supported.  

My point is that it’s not like he’s been hiring his cousin who got laid off at the gas station to be the GM or his favorite waitress at the diner to be the coach (although I guess he did marry her and then make her team president, so...)

 

Your 2nd paragraph is fair.  I don’t agree with the first paragraph at all.  TG did not give a crap about winning — the Sabres were purely an investment opportunity for him, which he cashed out of as soon as he had a good bid.  Rigas didn’t spend any money on the team — the Peca holdout, which was over a few hundred thousand, effectively torpedoed the Hasek era.  And TP IMHO absolutely cares about winning — that’s why he fired DR/RR and TM/DDB — because those groups let things fall apart.  

I don't believe this is true. From what i recall, he purchased the team to get them out of limbo and make certain they stayed in Buffalo. He was interested in winning, but was also very concerned with the bottom line and those 2 thoughts often conflict.  It was a good thing that he purchased the team and they had great success under him, it's probably also a good thing that he sold the team, because I don't feel he was the type of owner a sports franchise needs for long term success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Zamboni said:

My opinion is based on quality of ownership and what they have done for the organization and community.

You can have your opinion based on playoff appearances. No one is wrong here. It’s just opinions.

I voted "No" only because of Pegula's contributions to the city and his commitment to Buffalo.   I value that more than anything else. 

Otherwise, he is massive failure as a Hockey Owner in every other category that I can think off.  I hope he gets it right soon. 

Quality of Ownership?  I have a hard time giving Pegula any props for Quality of the product.  The losing, the firings and dysfunction in the executive ranks, the revolving door of coaches. 

Rigas and Golisano both ran things better.   Success on the ice counts for something. 

Rigas tried.  He had other issues, especially with his kids.  Rigas's team actually made it to a Cup final (no goal). 

If Golisano actually liked hockey and was not so cheap regarding the team he might have won a Cup.  Golisano bought the team just to help keep them in buffalo and make a buck, which he did. 

the Knox's were outstanding and classy all the way. 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

February 22, 2011 (Pegula Day) was quite the roller coaster for me. He had me tearing up when he looked at Perreault and the "reason for existence" line gave me chills. Then, unfortunately, he kept talking. All the signs of trouble were there from the start. Lindy ain't goin' anywhere? It wasn't Terry's call. "I like hard-nosed, gritty players." (close to verbatim) Also not his call. He went over to the News editorial board and cleaned the gunk from under his nails onto the conference room table, a clear sign of disdain. He asked them was Darcy had done wrong, then told them part of the reason the team had quit was the negativity in the paper's coverage.

I've consistently credited him with ponying up the money and wanting to win. It's just not enough to want to win and to spend money. He's not a smart hockey guy. He's meddled (the latest nugget of evidence is three calls a day to his GM). His hires have been terrible. Botterill, the one hire he made it clear he was owning after saying he didn't have much to do with hiring Murray, is already halfway out the door because of a bad coaching hire and poor roster construction.

He's used the team as his personal toy in order to play "fantasy" owner. He said he didn't know the team was for sale in 2002, which makes his "superfan" claim bogus. He named his dog Sydney.

Should I continue?

Almost every complaint you would probably have  with the vast majority of owners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PASabreFan said:

Smell, you forgot that Terry thinks one of the biggest things Botterill has going for him is that he's the only three-time World Junior gold medal winner alive on the face of the earth.

I'd not heard that one. Like I said: I think that both his criteria and instincts for decision making are below average. I do believe he operates in good faith, though. So there's that.

1 hour ago, klos1963 said:

I don't believe this is true. From what i recall, he purchased the team to get them out of limbo and make certain they stayed in Buffalo. He was interested in winning, but was also very concerned with the bottom line and those 2 thoughts often conflict.  It was a good thing that he purchased the team and they had great success under him, it's probably also a good thing that he sold the team, because I don't feel he was the type of owner a sports franchise needs for long term success.

I feel like maybe we've kicked around the idea that, maybe, just maybe, under certain circumstances, it's actually beneficial to have an owner who keeps a close eye on the bottom line, and demands that the team be operated in a sustainable and profitable manner. The idea being: Having a boss/owner with clearly defined fiscal limits can make the decision makers more efficient, more prudent -- smarter. The related idea being: Having a boss/owner who will throw money at any problem may lead to less robust analyses by the people doing the work.

Of course, Black Sunday was what it was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

What I'm asking for is too much to ask? Is it greedy? Just be smart. Get out of the way. You coached kids in Olean. Wonderful. You don't know the game. Act like the fan you claimed to be and make winning, not your ego, priority one. None of us would own this team the way he has, and Terry's just a poster here. One whose posts would get endless eye rolls.

He's the least informed/nuanced sports fan you will ever know.

I genuinely believe his recent comments on Phil Housley at the NFL meetings in Arizona were honest observations from the heart.  He was asked about Phil and a coaching change, and he said he thinks he's capable of becoming a great coach, and he references the fact that he was a great player (meaningless!).

Then we hear from Botterill saying the decision was his alone, no input from Terry, and Botterill phoned Pegula Sunday morning to tell him (and to get his blessing on) firing the HC later that same day.

From the evidence at hand, Pegula did not realize he had a coaching problem, nor would he, as he doesn't know jack about hockey.

When a professional sports franchise is consistently bad for long periods of time, there is only one place to look: ownership.

We should all be familiar with this as we lived through it with Wilson and the Bills for decades.

Ultimately, the Pegula debate comes down to how you inherently feel about having a team in Buffalo.

Either you are just happy to have one and will bend over backwards to retain one, or you aren't that way at all.

I'm in the latter category.  Buffalo, NY has ZERO business having pro sports teams in the 21st century.

It's a quirk of fate and history that we do.  If the forces of the universe have decided Buffalo really can't field competent major league sports programs, then let them go.  I'll move on.

Simply saying "Thank God we have a team" or "Thank God our owner isn't a horrific cheap skate" is nowhere close to good enough.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

He has no option to move the team. The credit goes to Tom for buying them out of bankruptcy and putting the no-move clause in the sales agreement. And of course to Terry for agreeing to the clause. As for throwing money at them, it wasn't a very smart decision in the summer of 2011, was it?

 

And Terry, not Darcy, made that decision. Terry and his Pittsburgh entourage who had seen it work down there. Black, Sawyer, Benson. Patrick maybe. Battista?!

We have no idea whether or not TP can move the team.  None of us has ever seen the contract.  We also have no idea whether TG "insisted" on a no-movement clause (assuming it exists, and doesn't expire or have other loopholes) or whether TP agreed to it when it was brought up because he wants to keep the team there anyway.

Regarding the tank -- do you think it was TP's idea, or was he following his GM's recommendation?  I suspect it's the latter, which, if correct, would argue against the "meddling" theory.

 

2 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

Watch the clip of Briere's overtime goal in Game 6 against the Canes and tell me that guy with his hands on his head didn't care. Not a glass of Merlot in sight.

Of course he was happy they scored.  It was a thrilling moment.  He'd have had to have been dead not to react.  That doesn't mean he didn't care much more about the Benjamins than about the wins.  Every single action he took as owner was consistent with his public statements that it was critical that the team not lose money on a current basis -- i.e. he was openly, and repeatedly, not interested in funding operating losses.

 

2 hours ago, PASabreFan said:

What I'm asking for is too much to ask? Is it greedy? Just be smart. Get out of the way. You coached kids in Olean. Wonderful. You don't know the game. Act like the fan you claimed to be and make winning, not your ego, priority one. None of us would own this team the way he has, and Terry's just a poster here. One whose posts would get endless eye rolls.

So your willingness to fire him isn't based on results?  It's based on your perceptions of "meddling" -- including the unforgivable sin of speaking regularly with his GM (like at least 90% of other NHL owners)? 

Do you not believe that hiring Howie and firing Howie were JB's decisions? 

 

1 hour ago, klos1963 said:

I don't believe this is true. From what i recall, he purchased the team to get them out of limbo and make certain they stayed in Buffalo. He was interested in winning, but was also very concerned with the bottom line and those 2 thoughts often conflict.  It was a good thing that he purchased the team and they had great success under him, it's probably also a good thing that he sold the team, because I don't feel he was the type of owner a sports franchise needs for long term success.

Well, we don't know what was in his heart, but we do know that he didn't step in and buy the team until the price dropped to a ridiculously low number, which included the city forgiving something like $25MM in loans.  We also know that he sold the team a few years later for 3x what he paid for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

We have no idea whether or not TP can move the team.  None of us has ever seen the contract.  We also have no idea whether TG "insisted" on a no-movement clause (assuming it exists, and doesn't expire or have other loopholes) or whether TP agreed to it when it was brought up because he wants to keep the team there anyway.

Regarding the tank -- do you think it was TP's idea, or was he following his GM's recommendation?  I suspect it's the latter, which, if correct, would argue against the "meddling" theory.

 

Of course he was happy they scored.  It was a thrilling moment.  He'd have had to have been dead not to react.  That doesn't mean he didn't care much more about the Benjamins than about the wins.  Every single action he took as owner was consistent with his public statements that it was critical that the team not lose money on a current basis -- i.e. he was openly, and repeatedly, not interested in funding operating losses.

 

So your willingness to fire him isn't based on results?  It's based on your perceptions of "meddling" -- including the unforgivable sin of speaking regularly with his GM (like at least 90% of other NHL owners)? 

Do you not believe that hiring Howie and firing Howie were JB's decisions? 

 

Well, we don't know what was in his heart, but we do know that he didn't step in and buy the team until the price dropped to a ridiculously low number, which included the city forgiving something like $25MM in loans.  We also know that he sold the team a few years later for 3x what he paid for it.

I believe this was from the spoken word, not from his heart. But a long time ago. Yes  he got a sweetheart deal from the league, the NHL didn't not want to run the team anymore. He wansn't trying to sell the team, but was made an offer he couldn't turn down. I think TG goes down as a pretty respectable owner that helped stabilize the franchise and had some exciting moments on the ice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, dudacek said:

Just when he is finally getting the hang of things?

He is? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, inkman said:

He is? 

Sorry, forgot to turn on the irony font.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

We have no idea whether or not TP can move the team.  None of us has ever seen the contract.  We also have no idea whether TG "insisted" on a no-movement clause (assuming it exists, and doesn't expire or have other loopholes) or whether TP agreed to it when it was brought up because he wants to keep the team there anyway.

Regarding the tank -- do you think it was TP's idea, or was he following his GM's recommendation?  I suspect it's the latter, which, if correct, would argue against the "meddling" theory.

 

Of course he was happy they scored.  It was a thrilling moment.  He'd have had to have been dead not to react.  That doesn't mean he didn't care much more about the Benjamins than about the wins.  Every single action he took as owner was consistent with his public statements that it was critical that the team not lose money on a current basis -- i.e. he was openly, and repeatedly, not interested in funding operating losses.

 

So your willingness to fire him isn't based on results?  It's based on your perceptions of "meddling" -- including the unforgivable sin of speaking regularly with his GM (like at least 90% of other NHL owners)? 

Do you not believe that hiring Howie and firing Howie were JB's decisions? 

 

Well, we don't know what was in his heart, but we do know that he didn't step in and buy the team until the price dropped to a ridiculously low number, which included the city forgiving something like $25MM in loans.  We also know that he sold the team a few years later for 3x what he paid for it.

Just read an old article about the sale to Pegula. TG turned down an offer that was $70M more than what Pegula's offered , because the other buyer was going to move the team. Under terms of the deal, Pegula is not allowed to move the team, not that he would. http://www.espn.com/nhl/news/story?id=6087856

 

Edited by klos1963
  • Thanks (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything looks like it's moving in the right direction, until they actually play the games.

The Pegulas seem to be doing a great job with the Bills, so I believe they can do it. I don't really think the Sabres woes are are their fault. 

Anyway, what other choice do we have? Trump?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Skibum said:

Everything looks like it's moving in the right direction, until they actually play the games.

The Pegulas seem to be doing a great job with the Bills, so I believe they can do it. I don't really think the Sabres woes are are their fault. 

Anyway, what other choice do we have? Trump?

The Bills are showing signs of stability, a foundation for a solid team and sound football management. I wouldn't say the Pegula's are doing a great job, but they appear headed in the right direction. This season is important, the team needs to challenge for a playoff spot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, nfreeman said:

It continues to amaze me that the OP does not understand how freaking miraculous it was that the heavens opened up and gave us a stinking rich owner for BOTH of our teams who wants to win, doesn’t care what it costs and has no interest in moving the teams.

This is the beginning and end of this trash thread.

According to the Census, the Buffalo-Cheektowaga Metropolitan Statistical Area is 50th in population, right behind economic powerhouse Birmingham-Hoover, AL.  There is no Earthly reason why two out of the Big Four leagues still have teams here.  There's no big corporate money.  There's no giant TV deals.  There's no economic incentive.  Partnerships with Yancey's Fancy and TV ads for veinsveinsveins.com don't support a team.  There are many, many larger markets with would-be owners that would pay for these teams, and in several instances, they almost have.  There's only two reasons that these teams are still in Buffalo: 1) revenue sharing; 2) we have ownership that wants them here.

So do all the mental gymnastics you want, add all the qualifying language to your arguments, and dream up some imaginary ownership group that keeps the teams in town, wants to win, spends, and hires the GMs you thought you wanted.  The reason you're not reduced to watching the national broadcasts of the Los Angeles Bills and the Seattle Sabres is the actual, real-life owners.

Should the current ownership continue to strive to produce a championship team in each league?  Yes.

Should the current ownership be subjected to reasonable scrutiny?  Yes.

Should the current ownership be "fired," likely resulting in the relocation of both franchises?  Don't waste my ***** time.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, IKnowPhysics said:

This is the beginning and end of this trash thread.

According to the Census, the Buffalo-Cheektowaga Metropolitan Statistical Area is 50th in population, right behind economic powerhouse Birmingham-Hoover, AL.  There is no Earthly reason why two out of the Big Four leagues still have teams here.  There's no big corporate money.  There's no giant TV deals.  There's no economic incentive.  Partnerships with Yancey's Fancy and TV ads for veinsveinsveins.com don't support a team.  There are many, many larger markets with would-be owners that would pay for these teams, and in several instances, they almost have.  There's only two reasons that these teams are still in Buffalo: 1) revenue sharing; 2) we have ownership that wants them here.

So do all the mental gymnastics you want, add all the qualifying language to your arguments, and dream up some imaginary ownership group that keeps the teams in town, wants to win, spends, and hires the GMs you thought you wanted.  The reason you're not reduced to watching the national broadcasts of the Los Angeles Bills and the Seattle Sabres is the actual, real-life owners.

Should the current ownership continue to strive to produce a championship team in each league?  Yes.

Should the current ownership be subjected to reasonable scrutiny?  Yes.

Should the current ownership be "fired," likely resulting in the relocation of both franchises?  Don't waste my ***** time.

So I'm not on ignore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, klos1963 said:

Just read an old article about the sale to Pegula. TG turned down an offer that was $70M more than what Pegula's offered , because the other buyer was going to move the team. Under terms of the deal, Pegula is not allowed to move the team, not that he would. http://www.espn.com/nhl/news/story?id=6087856

Nice try, but some of these people don't care about news reports from credible sources. It's 2019 and we're entitled to our own facts. Besides, we can't ever really know anything, can we? Show me the contract! PDF file will do. But is it real?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, nfreeman said:

Regarding the tank -- do you think it was TP's idea, or was he following his GM's recommendation?  I suspect it's the latter, which, if correct, would argue against the "meddling" theory.

Darcy said on WGR in the spring of 2013 that the owner would decide the extent of the rebuild. At the same time cited Minnesota as a team that rebuilt the right way, and it wasn't by tanking. No way Darcy cooked up that plan. And that's why he was gone in the fall.

2 hours ago, nfreeman said:

So your willingness to fire him isn't based on results?  It's based on your perceptions of "meddling" -- including the unforgivable sin of speaking regularly with his GM (like at least 90% of other NHL owners)?

I assume you have the phone logs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Zamboni said:

Well, it’s overwhelmingly a no.... smart

I'm only slightly surprised the margin is that high. I'm a little encouraged that slightly over 20% would pull the trigger. Maybe the butterfly effect can kick in and start the process of getting rid of these people (they can stay in OP).

The support is really all about this idea he's keeping the team here, and he's spent a lot of money, and he cares about winning. And he built a donut shop under a practice rink (thanks, taxpayers).

There are 32 NHL franchises. There's not another wealthy dude who would buy the team, keep it here, spend money and try to win. And be better than Terry at it. Gotcha.

Edited by PASabreFan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

I'm only slightly surprised the margin is that high. I'm a little encouraged that slightly over 20% would pull the trigger. Maybe the butterfly effect can kick in and start the process of getting rid of these people (they can stay in OP).

The support is really all about this idea he's keeping the team here, and he's spent a lot of money, and he cares about winning. And he built a donut shop under a practice rink (thanks, taxpayers).

There are 32 NHL franchises. There's not another wealthy dude who would buy the team, keep it here, spend money and try to win. And be better than Terry at it. Gotcha.

Sorry but you lost the election. Too large of a majority for recount.

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

Darcy said on WGR in the spring of 2013 that the owner would decide the extent of the rebuild. At the same time cited Minnesota as a team that rebuilt the right way, and it wasn't by tanking. No way Darcy cooked up that plan. And that's why he was gone in the fall.

I assume you have the phone logs? 

So you think TP forced the tank on DR?  And this is because he said the owner gets to decide the scope of the rebuild?  Doesn't the owner get to decide everything, by either approving it or declining approval?  And don't all major decisions generally get run by the owner?

Did TP force the tank on TM also?

Do you not think most owners speak with their GMs regularly?  So someone who owns something worth, say, $200MM to $500MM doesn't speak regularly with the guy who runs it for him?

 

23 minutes ago, PASabreFan said:

I'm only slightly surprised the margin is that high. I'm a little encouraged that slightly over 20% would pull the trigger. Maybe the butterfly effect can kick in and start the process of getting rid of these people (they can stay in OP). 

The support is really all about this idea he's keeping the team here, and he's spent a lot of money, and he cares about winning. And he built a donut shop under a practice rink (thanks, taxpayers).

There are 32 NHL franchises. There's not another wealthy dude who would buy the team, keep it here, spend money and try to win. And be better than Terry at it. Gotcha.

A "donut shop under a practice rink?"  Do you not think TP has invested substantial amounts into downtown Buffalo? 

As for whether someone else would buy the team, keep it here, etc. -- there's no need to speculate.  The team has been sold twice in the past 15 years.  The first time around, no one wanted to buy it until it was deeply discounted -- and that buyer refused to spend money on it and thus dismantled possibly the best team they've ever had.  The second time, there was one bidder, and it was the one we ended up with. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

News Bulletin!!!!!!!!!! PA has gone off the rails. Continuing coverage on SabreSpace.

  • Haha (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...