Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Open now for discussion of all things Darlo!

Moderators: mikkyx, uncovered

User avatar
dfc1883
Posts: 270
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 7:24 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by dfc1883 » Fri May 04, 2012 7:50 am

...don't get me wrong, it's fantastic that an opportunity may be there to get back into Darlington at the first time of asking, but I'd love to hear of other potentially avenues that are being explored too.

It seems obvious on here, with it being a 'fans' club that people would love to go back to Feethams, and we should explore giving the fans what they want, so I'd like an official word from DFC1883 group on Feethams and what it would take to move back there.

Yes I know 50 people will reply - 'we're never going back to Feethams', but no one as far as I've read has an official word as to why not - just speculation that housing will be developed there, or that the land is not for sale without actually knowing. It would be a shame if this wasn't explored.

Also are any other venues or plots of land being explored?, It's such a great opportunity for us to find the right venue and I don't want to see us waste this opportunity by diving in head first to the rugby club idea. (This doesn't mean I'm against a rugby club move, but that I'd like to know of all of the other ideas being explored)

User avatar
wellindarlo
Posts: 1072
Joined: Thu Jan 05, 2012 8:51 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by wellindarlo » Fri May 04, 2012 7:59 am

I agree dfc1883, it would be good to see what options there are e.g.

1. Blackwell Meadows development, joint DRFC and DFC

2. West Park development, joint DMRFC and DFC

3. Feethams development, joint DMRFC and DFC
Image

User avatar
jazzydfc
Posts: 222
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 4:05 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by jazzydfc » Fri May 04, 2012 8:15 am

As I said in another post yesterday Mowdens West park development has been planned for at least 5 years and as yet other then plans being available to view, nothing has happened, to clear the land, build a clubhouse and lay pitches would take at least another 2 years probably longer.
Saying that if it did go ahead I could walk there.

Tori_Gill
Posts: 522
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 11:41 am
Team Supported: DFC
Location: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by Tori_Gill » Fri May 04, 2012 8:17 am

Blackwell Meadows would be our first choice as it could be developed quickly. We also wouldn't be groundsharing as we would have our own pitch.

Other ideas banded about are West Park but could take years, Lingfield Point, again could take years and most recently mentioned to me, the Central Park development. All worth exploring of course.
Let's be proud of what we have achieved, Darlington Football Club needs to survive so let's all be in this together because this is your club now and your club needs you.

User avatar
divas
Posts: 13141
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 1:38 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by divas » Fri May 04, 2012 8:31 am

Think it all boils down to cost. To completely develop somewhere would cost crazy money and then you start to again incur all the associated running costs once it's up and running - admittedly a lot less than the arena but they'll still exist.

For me a groundshare with someone else be that a rugby club or whatever allows us to share costs. Given that there have been noises about this sports hub at Blackwell which would presumably be given external funding by Sport England or whatever name they go by it sounds on the face of it to be the most cost efficient way to do it, possibly the only way to do it.

Nothing wrong with doing investigation work but really beggars (which is what we are like it or not) can't be choosers.

ted_do
Posts: 1300
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:04 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by ted_do » Fri May 04, 2012 8:32 am

dfc1883 wrote:...don't get me wrong, it's fantastic that an opportunity may be there to get back into Darlington at the first time of asking, but I'd love to hear of other potentially avenues that are being explored too.

It seems obvious on here, with it being a 'fans' club that people would love to go back to Feethams, and we should explore giving the fans what they want, so I'd like an official word from DFC1883 group on Feethams and what it would take to move back there.

Yes I know 50 people will reply - 'we're never going back to Feethams', but no one as far as I've read has an official word as to why not - just speculation that housing will be developed there, or that the land is not for sale without actually knowing. It would be a shame if this wasn't explored.

Also are any other venues or plots of land being explored?, It's such a great opportunity for us to find the right venue and I don't want to see us waste this opportunity by diving in head first to the rugby club idea. (This doesn't mean I'm against a rugby club move, but that I'd like to know of all of the other ideas being explored)
Agree with that, I hope this is high on 1883s agenda I fell they may need more help and some of us long standing fans may have to take a lead in 1883, as we would want to learn from our past history to make sure we dont make the same mistakes.

screaminscull
Posts: 211
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 9:28 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by screaminscull » Fri May 04, 2012 8:38 am

Tori i understand what you are saying about Blackwell Meadows but if fans would not go to our last out of town stadium, why would they go to blackwell ?
I really think 1883 should explore every opportunity to try and get somewhere IN the town, Feethams would be 1st choice for everyone prob followed by Central Park.

Q8Quaker
Posts: 115
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 7:46 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by Q8Quaker » Fri May 04, 2012 8:40 am

Tori_Gill wrote:Blackwell Meadows would be our first choice as it could be developed quickly. We also wouldn't be groundsharing as we would have our own pitch.

Other ideas banded about are West Park but could take years, Lingfield Point, again could take years and most recently mentioned to me, the Central Park development. All worth exploring of course.
After being involved to some extent with 1883 regarding pub / club fundraising, the feedback I received from a large % of the population I talked to was that the arena was never going to work due to its location i.e. to far out of the town centre. I don't agree with this sentiment but a lot of fans do (just read this board). In light of this, why would we consider going down the same route and developing a ground in an area just as remote? To me, after the disasters of the last ten years we need to ensure the next move is the right one, not just that its convenient at the present time.

m62exile
Posts: 2195
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:11 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by m62exile » Fri May 04, 2012 8:45 am

Guys its fine to have preferences and all that but as Divas hints above - our first choices may not be achievable. Cost, ability to share overheads and the availability of grants seem more important considerations to me.

PierremontQuaker03
Posts: 1885
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2009 11:53 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by PierremontQuaker03 » Fri May 04, 2012 8:55 am

While I agree that a return to Feethams would be great - we have got to think of sustainability - a share with the rugby club et al might be the best way forward.

We havn't got a chairman now who will dip his money in his pocket when things are tight to tide us over. Spreading the risk/costs will be the best way forward.
“If you can't hit a driver, don't.”
Greg Norman

User avatar
divas
Posts: 13141
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 1:38 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by divas » Fri May 04, 2012 9:05 am

People are saying how they are re-invigorated and looking forward to watching the team next season, travelling to Shildon/Bishop etc. Then in another breath people saying that Blackwell Meadows is too far out of town. If people aren't willing to travel then we won't even get to the point where we can move back to the town.

Town centre land costs a premium, a premium that we can't afford. We're just going to have to accept that while the solution may not be perfect at least it will allow us to sustain ourselves which is what this is all about, it seems some are losing that focus already.

herts_darlo
Posts: 352
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2009 7:18 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by herts_darlo » Fri May 04, 2012 9:06 am

Can I just be clear - 1883 haven't ruled out any option as yet, including Feethams.

We have a couple of options that can be made suitable for a return to Darlo within a year, while we work on finding and developing a new home for the long-term. We recognise the importance of being back in the town as soon as possible; we're not claiming that we can build a sparkly new stadium within a year though.

A thorough investigation and planning/costing process will need to be undertaken before proper options can be put to anyone. This will not (and should not) be a quick process.

Mazz Javerick
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:05 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by Mazz Javerick » Fri May 04, 2012 9:13 am

It fucking appalls me when I hear people deriding the end of neasham road and Blackwell as 'out of town'.

Makes me wonder whether we've ever deserved a team when you hear this shite trotted out by lazy arse darlo wankers.

Darlogramps
Posts: 5247
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 10:47 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by Darlogramps » Fri May 04, 2012 9:14 am

People will travel anywhere so long as the product is good enough. If Darlo are winning and doing well, plenty of people will travel to Blackwell Meadows, if of course that is the route we take.

I think the "it's too far out of town" reason is more of an excuse. If you wanted to go to a game , you'd find a way to get there.
If ever you're bored or miserable:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlZohZoadGY

SFG
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 2:11 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by SFG » Fri May 04, 2012 9:14 am

Having successfully managed so far to suppress my excitement about the pending trip to see Cammell Laird FC, I have to say that whoever is now Directing our (new) Club had better consult season ticket holders before they make any more decisions.

In particular, they need to realise that the level of continuing support will - for most fans - depend on the quality of the team, the entertainment experience and the standard/accessibility of the venue. Personally I‘ve have enough of standing in miserable grounds like Ebbsfleet and Braintree without wishing to repeat the experience for home matches.

The costs of developing a new stadium are enormous.

For example, York City hope to move – with the local RLC – into a new out of City centre stadium in a couple of years time. The cost of their 6000 capacity stadium is £14 million (paid for from “developer gain” i.e. the development of adjacent land). Costs are that high because the venue needs to be flexible enough to generate income 24/7 to subsidise successful sports teams.

If Darlington really are serious about a return to the Football League – and continue to rule out use of the Arena – then they had better come up quickly with a 5 year business plan that is convincing. Otherwise current season ticket holders may fall for the attractions of one of the north east “big three” .

Quakerz
Posts: 20958
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by Quakerz » Fri May 04, 2012 9:17 am

Darlogramps wrote:People will travel anywhere so long as the product is good enough. If Darlo are winning and doing well, plenty of people will travel to Blackwell Meadows, if of course that is the route we take.

I think the "it's too far out of town" reason is more of an excuse. If you wanted to go to a game , you'd find a way to get there.
It's always going to be the case when people know Feethams is stood empty. But it's not as if we can just wander in, stick a stadium on it (even if we had the 6-8 million required), and bobs your uncle, but people just don't seem to get it.
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

ted_do
Posts: 1300
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:04 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by ted_do » Fri May 04, 2012 9:24 am

SFG wrote:Having successfully managed so far to suppress my excitement about the pending trip to see Cammell Laird FC, I have to say that whoever is now Directing our (new) Club had better consult season ticket holders before they make any more decisions.

In particular, they need to realise that the level of continuing support will - for most fans - depend on the quality of the team, the entertainment experience and the standard/accessibility of the venue. Personally I‘ve have enough of standing in miserable grounds like Ebbsfleet and Braintree without wishing to repeat the experience for home matches.

The costs of developing a new stadium are enormous.

For example, York City hope to move – with the local RLC – into a new out of City centre stadium in a couple of years time. The cost of their 6000 capacity stadium is £14 million (paid for from “developer gain” i.e. the development of adjacent land). Costs are that high because the venue needs to be flexible enough to generate income 24/7 to subsidise successful sports teams.

If Darlington really are serious about a return to the Football League – and continue to rule out use of the Arena – then they had better come up quickly with a 5 year business plan that is convincing. Otherwise current season ticket holders may fall for the attractions of one of the north east “big three” .
Not just me then :clap: I could cry at where we have ended up, but I dont blame 1883 and Divas has made some valid points on costs. I`m taking stock at the mo I don’t know what to think, but I know there is to much happy clapping about wilderness years playing non league football outside of Darlington stood in the poring rain and pissing in a portacabin. :(

Mazz Javerick
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:05 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by Mazz Javerick » Fri May 04, 2012 9:28 am

ted_do wrote:
Not just me then :clap: I could cry at were we have ended up, but I dont blame 1883 and Divas has made some valid points on costs. I`m taking stock at the mo I don’t now what to think, but I know there is to much happy clapping about wilderness years playing non league football outside of Darlington stood in the poring rain and pissing in a portacabin. :(
But the thing is ted, this was the only outcome outside of wrapping up the club for good. You may as well try and be positive about it, because whether we went down this route or phoenixed it, we would still be homeless and playing basement football.

Quakerz
Posts: 20958
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by Quakerz » Fri May 04, 2012 9:31 am

Yep.

It was always going to happen once "he who shall no longer be named" started asking for clauses which we couldn't agree to.
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

User avatar
divas
Posts: 13141
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 1:38 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by divas » Fri May 04, 2012 9:33 am

And it's started already, didn't take long for the euphoria of the club being saved to wear off. I fear once people start to realise that it will be a slog, at some crap grounds witnessing crap football the enthusiasm will drain even further. I think too many people think things will be automatically fixed and we'll magically end up at Feethams playing league football. The real hard work starts here.....

ted_do
Posts: 1300
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:04 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by ted_do » Fri May 04, 2012 9:36 am

Yep your right, 1883 have done their best and well done, How has it ever come to this and how do we move on.
We need some Darlington "Big Wigs" to sort the arena cost out as its doing no one any good that thing stood rotting and unused on the edge of our town, whilst Darlington citizens are forced out of town to watch our home town club play football.

Mazz Javerick
Posts: 127
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2012 9:05 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by Mazz Javerick » Fri May 04, 2012 9:39 am

ted_do wrote:Yep your right, 1883 have done their best and well done, How has it ever come to this and how do we move on.
We need some Darlington "Big Wigs" to sort the arena cost out as its doing no one any good that thing stood rotting and unused on the edge of our town, whilst Darlington citizens are forced out of town to watch our home town club play football.
The arena is finished ted, for right or wrong. Deal with it.

ted_do
Posts: 1300
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 9:04 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by ted_do » Fri May 04, 2012 9:40 am

Mazz Javerick wrote:
ted_do wrote:Yep your right, 1883 have done their best and well done, How has it ever come to this and how do we move on.
We need some Darlington "Big Wigs" to sort the arena cost out as its doing no one any good that thing stood rotting and unused on the edge of our town, whilst Darlington citizens are forced out of town to watch our home town club play football.
The arena is finished ted, for right or wrong. Deal with it.
OK :(

Quakerz
Posts: 20958
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by Quakerz » Fri May 04, 2012 9:44 am

Cost to run the Arena - 270k

Cost to groundshare (anticipated) - 25k

A tenth.

To be honest, in L2, if the Arena costs 270k a year to run, that should be "doable" - even the smallest clubs have turnover of c£2 million thanks to tv and league money. Maybe it might be workable at Conference level with gates of 2,000 - I know the original business plan had estimated turnover of £1.6m

But at the level we're going to be at, which involves lower gates, cheaper (by another two levels) tickets, and even cheaper than that standing tickets, less sponsorship etc etc, we can't afford to play in town at the Arena.

I must say, whilst the cost is obviously phohibitive at the level we're going to be at, I have even more questions than ever before about how it was unworkable and the reason for our debts, in L2!
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

User avatar
divas
Posts: 13141
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 1:38 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by divas » Fri May 04, 2012 10:02 am

Don't forget that £270K is the total cost to rent, maintain and run and doesn't take into account potential revenue generated.

Would have been interesting to see what non matchday income at the Arena looked like in terms of profit. Or even matchday income (excluding tickets) last season to see how far away from £270K that was.

Again, a decent concert a season would pay for the Arena for the full season. If i were S&S i'd be looking at ways to make money from it as it stands, despite it not being a correct fit for our needs it's still a great facility and DBC should be able to see what can be generated by having a facility like that in the town.

I bet it would make a very decent dent in the £270K - sounds to me though the move away from the Arena has been partly due to the fact that we don't have the resource to run a full-time hospitality business as well as a football club, which is fair enough - it reduces liability massively, and we need as few liabilities as possible.

m62exile
Posts: 2195
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 2:11 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by m62exile » Fri May 04, 2012 10:02 am

Listening to DP yesterday it seems like quite a fair chunk of the £270k pa was due to the servicing needs of the stadium and work that was needing to be done as it gets towards 10 years, including tightening every bolt on the framework etc. (interview is on the echo website) it would be fair to assume therefore that this cost is quite a bit higher than in recent years.

So to Quakerz point, it does raise questions about how it was unworkable in L2.

Q8Quaker
Posts: 115
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 7:46 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by Q8Quaker » Fri May 04, 2012 10:14 am

divas wrote:Don't forget that £270K is the total cost to rent, maintain and run and doesn't take into account potential revenue generated.

Would have been interesting to see what non matchday income at the Arena looked like in terms of profit. Or even matchday income (excluding tickets) last season to see how far away from £270K that was.

Again, a decent concert a season would pay for the Arena for the full season. If i were S&S i'd be looking at ways to make money from it as it stands, it's still a great facility and DBC should be able to see what can be generated by having a facility like that in the town.

I bet it would make a very decent dent in the £270K - sounds to me though the move away from the Arena has been partly due to the fact that we don't have the resource to run a full-time hospitality business as well as a football club, which is fair enough.
I think the problem for the 1883 board was the uncertainty of revenue from the non footballing activities at the arena. In my mind, run correctly and with the collective brainpower of 1000 shareholders, numerous revenue streams could have been developed that would have easily covered the 270K annual running costs. The issue was one of risk but it needs to be remembered that risk as well as being a threat can also be an opportunity.

User avatar
divas
Posts: 13141
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 1:38 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by divas » Fri May 04, 2012 10:16 am

Q8Quaker wrote:
divas wrote:Don't forget that £270K is the total cost to rent, maintain and run and doesn't take into account potential revenue generated.

Would have been interesting to see what non matchday income at the Arena looked like in terms of profit. Or even matchday income (excluding tickets) last season to see how far away from £270K that was.

Again, a decent concert a season would pay for the Arena for the full season. If i were S&S i'd be looking at ways to make money from it as it stands, it's still a great facility and DBC should be able to see what can be generated by having a facility like that in the town.

I bet it would make a very decent dent in the £270K - sounds to me though the move away from the Arena has been partly due to the fact that we don't have the resource to run a full-time hospitality business as well as a football club, which is fair enough.
I think the problem for the 1883 board was the uncertainty of revenue from the non footballing activities at the arena. In my mind, run correctly and with the collective brainpower of 1000 shareholders, numerous revenue streams could have been developed that would have easily covered the 270K annual running costs. The issue was one of risk but it needs to be remembered that risk as well as being a threat can also be an opportunity.
yeah totally agree - i amended my post above to say exactly that - what it brings is big liabilities and that's something we cannot afford with limited cash, at the moment we need to get back on our feet and trying to do that whilst juggling a full time hospitality business would be difficult.

It's a shame a seperate company were not interested in coming in to run the arena purely as a venue and taking any profits from the hospitality side of things, matchday and non matchday and then charging us a fee to play there.

Quakerz
Posts: 20958
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 6:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by Quakerz » Fri May 04, 2012 10:21 am

Q8Quaker wrote:
divas wrote:Don't forget that £270K is the total cost to rent, maintain and run and doesn't take into account potential revenue generated.

Would have been interesting to see what non matchday income at the Arena looked like in terms of profit. Or even matchday income (excluding tickets) last season to see how far away from £270K that was.

Again, a decent concert a season would pay for the Arena for the full season. If i were S&S i'd be looking at ways to make money from it as it stands, it's still a great facility and DBC should be able to see what can be generated by having a facility like that in the town.

I bet it would make a very decent dent in the £270K - sounds to me though the move away from the Arena has been partly due to the fact that we don't have the resource to run a full-time hospitality business as well as a football club, which is fair enough.
I think the problem for the 1883 board was the uncertainty of revenue from the non footballing activities at the arena. In my mind, run correctly and with the collective brainpower of 1000 shareholders, numerous revenue streams could have been developed that would have easily covered the 270K annual running costs. The issue was one of risk but it needs to be remembered that risk as well as being a threat can also be an opportunity.
So why can't The Arena be a viable proposition to step back into a couple of seasons down the line after a couple of promotions?
Image

“Everybody knows where that club is going now, so I’m out of the way. They can carry on, it’s their club, they can keep it." - Raj Singh, 2017

User avatar
Spyman
Posts: 11899
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:04 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Before we dive head first into the Rugby Club share.

Post by Spyman » Fri May 04, 2012 10:29 am

Quakerz wrote:
Q8Quaker wrote:
divas wrote:Don't forget that £270K is the total cost to rent, maintain and run and doesn't take into account potential revenue generated.

Would have been interesting to see what non matchday income at the Arena looked like in terms of profit. Or even matchday income (excluding tickets) last season to see how far away from £270K that was.

Again, a decent concert a season would pay for the Arena for the full season. If i were S&S i'd be looking at ways to make money from it as it stands, it's still a great facility and DBC should be able to see what can be generated by having a facility like that in the town.

I bet it would make a very decent dent in the £270K - sounds to me though the move away from the Arena has been partly due to the fact that we don't have the resource to run a full-time hospitality business as well as a football club, which is fair enough.
I think the problem for the 1883 board was the uncertainty of revenue from the non footballing activities at the arena. In my mind, run correctly and with the collective brainpower of 1000 shareholders, numerous revenue streams could have been developed that would have easily covered the 270K annual running costs. The issue was one of risk but it needs to be remembered that risk as well as being a threat can also be an opportunity.
So why can't The Arena be a viable proposition to step back into a couple of seasons down the line after a couple of promotions?
Maybe it could be. Whether it will be there is another issue.
On Sunday April 29, 2012 at 10:25 pm, Darlo Cockney wrote:Sadly some people have nothing better to do that invent rumours.

We will be playing at the arena again next season - fact.

Quakerz - if you actually attended games and spoke to people you might actually find our facts, rather than spreading s*** on this board.

DC

Post Reply