Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Thread Closed 
ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
Author Message
SuperFlyBCat Offline
Banned

Posts: 49,583
Joined: Mar 2005
I Root For: America and UC
Location: Cincinnati
Post: #21
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 10:58 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 10:45 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Wonder what a ten team football/bball conference could get?
I wouldn't be at all surprised if that wasn't being explored, as well as a few other possible options...

Not by the Providence Mafia though.
04-18-2011 11:02 AM
Find all posts by this user
Metropolis777 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 608
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 26
I Root For: TCU
Location: Houston
Post: #22
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 10:39 AM)mattsarz Wrote:  $180m should be the target number, again based on my split of revenues.

I've got some other football demands to go along with that number.
  1. Guaranteed Big East conference game on ABC game on Black Friday.
  2. Guaranteed Big East conference game on Championship Saturday.
  3. A guarantee of at least 1 Big East conference game on ABC, ESPN, or ESPN2 from October 15 to the end of the season annually.
  4. Alternatively, if ABC/ESPN chooses not to broadcast a game on 1 of those 3 networks in a given week, they must broadcast TWO (2) Big East conference games on ESPNU that week.
  5. No Friday night games before November 1 without approval of the schools involved.
  6. No more than 2 Wednesday night games without approval of the schools involved.
  7. Conference retains all residual rights to games not selected by ESPN to use for local syndication sale or as inventory to start a Big East Network.
04-18-2011 11:09 AM
Find all posts by this user
uconnbaseball Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,608
Joined: Aug 2005
Reputation: 84
I Root For: Divorce, Rivals
Location:

The Parliament Awards
Post: #23
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
I like that we are negotiating this at this time. We have a level of leverage that we may not have had in the past.

I would be happy with 160 million or so. Anything more is just gravy.
04-18-2011 11:16 AM
Find all posts by this user
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #24
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 10:47 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  In reality, it's exactly the opposite for the university presidents - for them, if "all things are equal", then there's absolutely zero reason to make a move and incur a massive amount of litigation costs.

What litigation do you foresee? The only thing that seems possible to me is a fight over who gets the "Big East" name, and i'd imagine that won't even materialize. The basketball-only schools would get to keep it.
(This post was last modified: 04-18-2011 11:27 AM by quo vadis.)
04-18-2011 11:26 AM
Find all posts by this user
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #25
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 08:50 AM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  Its time to split Mark and make some money.

I'm in favor of a split, but .... this development would seem to indicate the exact opposite when it comes to money. Seems clear that we are going to at least triple our ESPN dollars with the current hybrid arrangement, so that's evidence that it is working ...
(This post was last modified: 04-18-2011 11:28 AM by quo vadis.)
04-18-2011 11:28 AM
Find all posts by this user
dgrace4cards Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,333
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 192
I Root For: UL
Location: Louisville
Post: #26
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 11:09 AM)Metropolis777 Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 10:39 AM)mattsarz Wrote:  $180m should be the target number, again based on my split of revenues.

I've got some other football demands to go along with that number.
  1. Guaranteed Big East conference game on ABC game on Black Friday.
  2. Guaranteed Big East conference game on Championship Saturday.
  3. A guarantee of at least 1 Big East conference game on ABC, ESPN, or ESPN2 from October 15 to the end of the season annually.
  4. Alternatively, if ABC/ESPN chooses not to broadcast a game on 1 of those 3 networks in a given week, they must broadcast TWO (2) Big East conference games on ESPNU that week.
  5. No Friday night games before November 1 without approval of the schools involved.
  6. No more than 2 Wednesday night games without approval of the schools involved.
  7. Conference retains all residual rights to games not selected by ESPN to use for local syndication sale or as inventory to start a Big East Network.

I agree with this and your initial post 100% As fans, we shouldn't care as much about per school dollars, as long as its enough to run our programs at top level. We should care more about what actually affects us and thats our weekly timeslots, fair analyst coverage, and those highlighted slots like champ week, Black Friday, etc.

Please Big East don't succomb to early negotiations with ESPN just to go back to Wednesday, Friday, and ESPN U Saturday games. Shop this thing around and be open minded to Comcast, Turner ideas.

As for those in the conference wanting to accelerate negotiations I suspect thats most of the basketball schools and the budget suffering football schools. Sorry, but those running fiscally positive programs need to be able to pull the restraints on them, in order to maximize the deal and the timeslots.
04-18-2011 11:33 AM
Find all posts by this user
bitcruncher Offline
pepperoni roll psycho...
*

Posts: 61,859
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 526
I Root For: West Virginia
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post: #27
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 11:02 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 10:58 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 10:45 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Wonder what a ten team football/bball conference could get?
I wouldn't be at all surprised if that wasn't being explored, as well as a few other possible options...
Not by the Providence Mafia though.
Since they would no longer be involved, if the football schools dropped out to form an all-sports conference, does it matter?
04-18-2011 11:41 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
ohio1317 Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 5,675
Joined: Mar 2008
Reputation: 358
I Root For: Ohio State
Location:
Post: #28
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 11:26 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  What litigation do you foresee? The only thing that seems possible to me is a fight over who gets the "Big East" name, and i'd imagine that won't even materialize. The basketball-only schools would get to keep it.

While I think a split is very unlikely, I tend to agree. As long as the nine football schools leave the 8 basketball (or 10 and 7 if Villanovia is onboard) then it seems pretty clear. The Big East name (and tournament credits) stay with the basketball schools and the football schools are starting fresh. The only litigation would be over exit fees and I thought the get out of jail free card had been extended (may be wrong on that though).

The only thing that might make things more complicated is if they take on some extra basketball schools. If enough are taken that basketball credits are affected, the remaining schools might be able to argue it's more like they were kicked out of the conference than the others left it.

All of that said, Frank's probably right in that the cost is high. The basketball side would likely be losing basketball credits worth a lot and the successful formula for Big East basketball would be altered (which is a risk given the success of late).
04-18-2011 11:52 AM
Find all posts by this user
SF Husky Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,338
Joined: Jul 2004
Reputation: 295
I Root For: UCONN
Location:
Post: #29
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 10:20 AM)cuseroc Wrote:  I like the following from the article:


Sources indicate the early numbers range from $110 million to $130 million annually, but conference sources describe those figures as a starting point for any negotiation. The initial offer would fall short of the $155 million annual payout the ACC will receive from ESPN in a deal that kicks in this summer. But the bold push by ESPN shows the network wants to lock down college rights in the face of increasing competition


I LOL at those doubters who didnt think that the BE had enough juice to be able to get a deal similar to the other conferences and "should be happy to even double their current deal." And those that didnt think that the BE was valuable enough in the eyes of ESPN and other networks to land a big tv deal.

Well it appears to me that ESPN sees the league being so valuable that they want to do something that they normally wouldnt do, and thats to enter negotiations much earlier than normal to get a deal with the BE and take the league off the market. This is very good for the BE. ESPN cannot afford to lose more fb inventory and definitly cant afford to lose BE bb. The BE negotiators need to land a deal north of $180 million per year over a 7 to 10 year period, with multiple guaranteed time slots on ABC and language that allows for potential future expansion renegotiation. The league is negotiating from a position of strength now, just as many fans have predicted.

+1

I LOL at those people keep saying BE should be lucky to double its current TV contract. What a freaking joke. I been saying this for a long, long time that it is time for us to get paid. It is crazy how negative some people here are about the BE as if the B11 is some NFL caliber league while BE is not.

BE office better not screw this up. They better ask for $200M+ per year like PAC-12 commissioner is doing. If ESPN refuses, take it to the open market. We have enough of the BS bias coverage from ESPN about SEC and the B11.

I honestly think it would be unthinkable for ESPN to lose BE basketball. C'mon Fox and Comcast, step it up the plate if you guys want to play at big boy's table.
(This post was last modified: 04-18-2011 12:11 PM by SF Husky.)
04-18-2011 12:07 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
mattsarz Offline
TV Guide
*

Posts: 7,159
Joined: Mar 2006
Reputation: 110
I Root For: SU, Ariz. St.
Location: Painesville, OH
Post: #30
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 11:09 AM)Metropolis777 Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 10:39 AM)mattsarz Wrote:  $180m should be the target number, again based on my split of revenues.

I've got some other football demands to go along with that number.
  1. Guaranteed Big East conference game on ABC game on Black Friday.
  2. Guaranteed Big East conference game on Championship Saturday.
  3. A guarantee of at least 1 Big East conference game on ABC, ESPN, or ESPN2 from October 15 to the end of the season annually.
  4. Alternatively, if ABC/ESPN chooses not to broadcast a game on 1 of those 3 networks in a given week, they must broadcast TWO (2) Big East conference games on ESPNU that week.
  5. No Friday night games before November 1 without approval of the schools involved.
  6. No more than 2 Wednesday night games without approval of the schools involved.
  7. Conference retains all residual rights to games not selected by ESPN to use for local syndication sale or as inventory to start a Big East Network.

Agree mostly, except NO WEDNESDAYS!
04-18-2011 12:11 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Metropolis777 Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 608
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 26
I Root For: TCU
Location: Houston
Post: #31
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 12:11 PM)mattsarz Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 11:09 AM)Metropolis777 Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 10:39 AM)mattsarz Wrote:  $180m should be the target number, again based on my split of revenues.

I've got some other football demands to go along with that number.
  1. Guaranteed Big East conference game on ABC game on Black Friday.
  2. Guaranteed Big East conference game on Championship Saturday.
  3. A guarantee of at least 1 Big East conference game on ABC, ESPN, or ESPN2 from October 15 to the end of the season annually.
  4. Alternatively, if ABC/ESPN chooses not to broadcast a game on 1 of those 3 networks in a given week, they must broadcast TWO (2) Big East conference games on ESPNU that week.
  5. No Friday night games before November 1 without approval of the schools involved.
  6. No more than 2 Wednesday night games without approval of the schools involved.
  7. Conference retains all residual rights to games not selected by ESPN to use for local syndication sale or as inventory to start a Big East Network.

Agree mostly, except NO WEDNESDAYS!

I agree too but I'm conceding that Wednesday is going to happen no matter what since we've already had it. That's why I want it minimized.

I also want the Friday night games minimized to avoid conflict with high school games. By forcing them to November, you're into the playoffs and lots of HS teams are done.

Of course #3 and #4 need to be crafted properly to guarantee a minimum amount of conference games on ABC and ESPN. Otherwise, they could easily say screw it and just give us 2 games per week on ESPNU with nothing on the bigger networks.
(This post was last modified: 04-18-2011 12:21 PM by Metropolis777.)
04-18-2011 12:19 PM
Find all posts by this user
SF Husky Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,338
Joined: Jul 2004
Reputation: 295
I Root For: UCONN
Location:
Post: #32
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 12:19 PM)Metropolis777 Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 12:11 PM)mattsarz Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 11:09 AM)Metropolis777 Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 10:39 AM)mattsarz Wrote:  $180m should be the target number, again based on my split of revenues.

I've got some other football demands to go along with that number.
  1. Guaranteed Big East conference game on ABC game on Black Friday.
  2. Guaranteed Big East conference game on Championship Saturday.
  3. A guarantee of at least 1 Big East conference game on ABC, ESPN, or ESPN2 from October 15 to the end of the season annually.
  4. Alternatively, if ABC/ESPN chooses not to broadcast a game on 1 of those 3 networks in a given week, they must broadcast TWO (2) Big East conference games on ESPNU that week.
  5. No Friday night games before November 1 without approval of the schools involved.
  6. No more than 2 Wednesday night games without approval of the schools involved.
  7. Conference retains all residual rights to games not selected by ESPN to use for local syndication sale or as inventory to start a Big East Network.

Agree mostly, except NO WEDNESDAYS!

I agree too but I'm conceding that Wednesday is going to happen no matter what since we've already had it. That's why I want it minimized.

I also want the Friday night games minimized to avoid conflict with high school games. By forcing them to November, you're into the playoffs and lots of HS teams are done.

Of course #3 and #4 need to be crafted properly to guarantee a minimum amount of conference games on ABC and ESPN. Otherwise, they could easily say screw it and just give us 2 games per week on ESPNU with nothing on the bigger networks.

Great points. I hope the BE office is listening. At minimal, BE should be shooting for ACC level numbers on all fronts including TV coverage.
04-18-2011 12:24 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #33
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 11:33 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  I agree with this and your initial post 100% As fans, we shouldn't care as much about per school dollars, as long as its enough to run our programs at top level.

Problem is, "top level" is defined by per-school dollars. For example, if the SEC gets $5 million per school and that's more than anyone else, then it takes $5m to run a program at the top level. And if we are also getting $5m per school, then we are top-level too.

But if the SEC is getting $25m per school, then even if we boost ourselves from $5m to $17m, that $17m is no longer top level, it's $8m less.

The only way your thinking works is if there are absolute diminishing returns to dollars invested in athletics, e.g., if every dollar spent beyond say $17m is completely wasted, provides no additional program benefits.

But that's obviously not the case ... So we need to be very much concerned about "per-school". That's the whole ballgame ...
(This post was last modified: 04-18-2011 12:37 PM by quo vadis.)
04-18-2011 12:36 PM
Find all posts by this user
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #34
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 12:24 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  At minimal, BE should be shooting for ACC level numbers on all fronts including TV coverage.

I agree. There's no harm in asking or trying to negotiate something. Of course we might not get it, but, we surely won't if we don't stake out that position ...
04-18-2011 12:39 PM
Find all posts by this user
mattsarz Offline
TV Guide
*

Posts: 7,159
Joined: Mar 2006
Reputation: 110
I Root For: SU, Ariz. St.
Location: Painesville, OH
Post: #35
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 12:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 12:24 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  At minimal, BE should be shooting for ACC level numbers on all fronts including TV coverage.

I agree. There's no harm in asking or trying to negotiate something. Of course we might not get it, but, we surely won't if we don't stake out that position ...

$180m gets you slightly past ACC numbers so that should be the target.
04-18-2011 12:46 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
SF Husky Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,338
Joined: Jul 2004
Reputation: 295
I Root For: UCONN
Location:
Post: #36
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 12:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 12:24 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  At minimal, BE should be shooting for ACC level numbers on all fronts including TV coverage.

I agree. There's no harm in asking or trying to negotiate something. Of course we might not get it, but, we surely won't if we don't stake out that position ...

I seriously think BE needs to go to another company is ESPN does not agree to our terms. ESPN has openly promoted conferences that have big deals with them in SEC and B11 to the determent of the BE. BE better not settle for this crappy ass 2nd class citizen status as some posters think we are. UCONN just won our 3rd national championship. If there is a better basketball conference out there I like to know. Some people are smoking weed if they think UNC/DUKE basketball is worth more than all the storied programs in the BE.
04-18-2011 12:49 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
quo vadis Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 50,018
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2372
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #37
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 12:49 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 12:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 12:24 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  At minimal, BE should be shooting for ACC level numbers on all fronts including TV coverage.

I agree. There's no harm in asking or trying to negotiate something. Of course we might not get it, but, we surely won't if we don't stake out that position ...

I seriously think BE needs to go to another company is ESPN does not agree to our terms. ESPN has openly promoted conferences that have big deals with them in SEC and B11 to the determent of the BE. BE better not settle for this crappy ass 2nd class citizen status as some posters think we are. UCONN just won our 3rd national championship. If there is a better basketball conference out there I like to know. Some people are smoking weed if they think UNC/DUKE basketball is worth more than all the storied programs in the BE.

I don't think anyone doubts our basketball value, and there's absolutely no excuse if our negotiations can't boost that money higher (currently, we are 4th out of 6 BCS conferences in per-school basketball TV revenue).

But unfortunately, football is where the biggest bucks are at and we aren't as strong in that arena. Nevertheless, we need to drive the hardest bargain we can.
(This post was last modified: 04-18-2011 12:54 PM by quo vadis.)
04-18-2011 12:53 PM
Find all posts by this user
SF Husky Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 11,338
Joined: Jul 2004
Reputation: 295
I Root For: UCONN
Location:
Post: #38
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 12:53 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 12:49 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 12:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 12:24 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  At minimal, BE should be shooting for ACC level numbers on all fronts including TV coverage.

I agree. There's no harm in asking or trying to negotiate something. Of course we might not get it, but, we surely won't if we don't stake out that position ...

I seriously think BE needs to go to another company is ESPN does not agree to our terms. ESPN has openly promoted conferences that have big deals with them in SEC and B11 to the determent of the BE. BE better not settle for this crappy ass 2nd class citizen status as some posters think we are. UCONN just won our 3rd national championship. If there is a better basketball conference out there I like to know. Some people are smoking weed if they think UNC/DUKE basketball is worth more than all the storied programs in the BE.

I don't think anyone doubts our basketball value, and there's absolutely no excuse if our negotiations can't boost that money higher (currently, we are 4th out of 6 BCS conferences in per-school basketball TV revenue).

But unfortunately, football is where the biggest bucks are at and we aren't as strong in that arena. Nevertheless, we need to drive the hardest bargain we can.

B12 just proved losing two key programs did not cost them a dime. Some here keep boasting about how Nebraska's "national profile" etc etc. It sure did not hurt the B12. In fact, they have improved their lot. PAC-12 is asking for more money than the SEC and they got one storied program in USC.

BE settling for less than the ACC would be bad.
04-18-2011 01:01 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
dgrace4cards Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,333
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 192
I Root For: UL
Location: Louisville
Post: #39
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 12:36 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 11:33 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  I agree with this and your initial post 100% As fans, we shouldn't care as much about per school dollars, as long as its enough to run our programs at top level.

Problem is, "top level" is defined by per-school dollars. For example, if the SEC gets $5 million per school and that's more than anyone else, then it takes $5m to run a program at the top level. And if we are also getting $5m per school, then we are top-level too.

But if the SEC is getting $25m per school, then even if we boost ourselves from $5m to $17m, that $17m is no longer top level, it's $8m less.

The only way your thinking works is if there are absolute diminishing returns to dollars invested in athletics, e.g., if every dollar spent beyond say $17m is completely wasted, provides no additional program benefits.

But that's obviously not the case ... So we need to be very much concerned about "per-school". That's the whole ballgame ...

Let me clarify, I realize what you are saying by top shelf and an SEC school in football will trump us yearly, but what I mean by that is we should get enough to compete in BCS which we will with this new contract no matter with who it is......we were well behind the 8 ball the last few years with this contract. As a UL fan I'm not worried one bit, we collect in basketball yearly, and our football budget continues to rise...now with facilities all built in all the sports more or less, I would think extra cash from donors and from bball and football profits will now stay in those two budgets more, in addition to the tv contracts. I obviously want the best for each school in the conference as well, because it helps all of us to get paid. But I wouldn't rush into bed with ESPN a year and half early for Wednesday and Friday nights, and ESPN U on Saturdays.
04-18-2011 01:11 PM
Find all posts by this user
dgrace4cards Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,333
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 192
I Root For: UL
Location: Louisville
Post: #40
RE: ESPN, Big East talking extension per Sports Business Journal
(04-18-2011 12:49 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 12:39 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(04-18-2011 12:24 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  At minimal, BE should be shooting for ACC level numbers on all fronts including TV coverage.

I agree. There's no harm in asking or trying to negotiate something. Of course we might not get it, but, we surely won't if we don't stake out that position ...

I seriously think BE needs to go to another company is ESPN does not agree to our terms. ESPN has openly promoted conferences that have big deals with them in SEC and B11 to the determent of the BE. BE better not settle for this crappy ass 2nd class citizen status as some posters think we are. UCONN just won our 3rd national championship. If there is a better basketball conference out there I like to know. Some people are smoking weed if they think UNC/DUKE basketball is worth more than all the storied programs in the BE.

I'm sorry but its proven that we still don't get to the same level as they do....we don't like it, but thats the facts.
04-18-2011 01:14 PM
Find all posts by this user
Thread Closed 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.