Remove this ad

avatar

The Fresh Sole

Registered Member

Posts: 6,503

#301 [url]

Jul 12 12 11:29 PM

Rock were you there when Roman Vega was still there? I know where he's at now but do you know why he left?

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad

#302 [url]

Jul 12 12 11:30 PM

NikeDealer wrote:
 As far as materials being a higher cost and manufacturing prices going up. Lets not be fooled. It aint going up that much because competition in Asia is at an ALL TIME HIGH.. and if ONE factory doesn't make it for what you need another will.

Disagree....manufacturing competition in Asia is not at an all time high when you factor in Nike's Compliance standards.  Remember what Nike asks: quick samples, multiple turns, innovation tooling, on time production @ a negotiated price, and the BIGGY...work place standards for the employees.

"No Name" brands (by comparison) can float...Nike manufacturing is a RELATIONSHIP.  Not easy to start, maintain, or %!$@% around on.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

finnns2003

Registered Member

Posts: 22,815

#303 [url]

Jul 13 12 9:03 AM

I have a question, what is with the FuelBands? Why are they such garbage? I bought one of the first batch, and since then have had it replaced 3 times. Was their much R&D done on the longevity? Also, will future FuelBands be more what was advertised (i.e. a complete gym monitor on your wrist)

Quote    Reply   

#304 [url]

Jul 13 12 10:27 AM

Do you want the truth, or do you simply want a sugar coated response?

For those who don't need sweetener, gimmick.

For those who do, oh I am certain that if you buy enough bands, that you'll find a couple that will work for you, just like with the Nike + system. 

Quote    Reply   
avatar

vood99

Registered Member

Posts: 2,130

#305 [url]

Jul 13 12 10:27 AM

finnns2003 wrote:
I have a question, what is with the FuelBands? Why are they such garbage? I bought one of the first batch, and since then have had it replaced 3 times. Was their much R&D done on the longevity? Also, will future FuelBands be more what was advertised (i.e. a complete gym monitor on your wrist)
finnns, I'd venture that you're paying the price for being an early adopter along with the fact that most people just use the things as fashion accessories so they may not know or care that the devices don't function as intended.

  

Quote    Reply   
avatar

vood99

Registered Member

Posts: 2,130

#306 [url]

Jul 13 12 11:01 AM

ThorrocksJs wrote:
Nike wasted umbro and cole haan sadly.The lunar soled shoes were interesting stuff but it was just a fancy ripoff of the Mark Mcnairy shoes that are being copied anywhere.Nike is also wasting the converse line completely converse should be doing way better than this .They should have retroed the olympic models Maguc and Bird wore.I agree rock Bobbito might not be the best guy to oversee or have direct input in the design recess but he would do great working with the older bball kicks like the dunk,terminator,af1,legend,dynasty etc.
Thorrocks, I agree that Jeremy Scott needs to be fired and his entire 'line' trashed. I'm guessing your an older cat just by the fact you dropped Bobbito's name and yeah, if anyone's

synonymous with Nike and Hip/Hop he'd be a good choice for a collaboration. But I'm not sure what he could bring to the table seeing as NSW will ensure that the quality remains doo doo. Additionally NSW would make the releases extremely hard for the average consumer to acquire.

Converse is just an afterthought to Nike - their inline product and their retro product are both trash. The former lacks design and quality while the latter just lacks quality. Absolute shame seeing as they have such a rich history - I wouldn't be surprised if they were 'unloaded' down the road due to them underperforming.



  

Quote    Reply   
avatar

vood99

Registered Member

Posts: 2,130

#307 [url]

Jul 13 12 11:16 AM

AKALONGSTROKE wrote:
vood99 wrote:
I agree with you on the over-engineering of basic shoes like women's pumps and air units in dress shoes just to warrant high prices. I'll be sad to see Cole Haan go the way of the dodo though.

Some of Nike's fundamental running shoes are OK - Pegasus, Structure Triax. It's the gimmicky, over-priced models that leave a bad taste with people.

You think Phil Knight's return had an impact on their growth in the last few years?       
Oh, there is no doubt about it. While on the sidelines and the other dude took over, Adidas started going all in. They bought Reebok, took over the NBA uniforms, started really making waves that Nike didn't see coming. The new guy in charge wanted to play fair, unlike the old Nike that we were used to with their advertising campaigns. Under new guy, all of a sudden, Nike started making good basketball shoes again like the Zoom BB line, those not of the pocket emptying experience, the LeBron III was made at this time as well. The quality of Nike Basketball shoes suddenly became a more bang for your buck type of experience!

What happened?

All hell broke loose in Beaverton, and they got rid of the fair minded guy. He wasn't a dig dirt, kick dirt, think nasty kind of guy.

I suppose they looked at the future, saw the comp rising, then had to do something to separate themselves from the pack again.

In other words, they panicked.

Now they've divested from Cole Haan and Umbro.



  



   Agreed. But Adidas is doing to Reebok what Nike is doing to Converse. Just keeping  them as a mere afterthought. There are some Kemp and Iverson re-issues coming in the near future but these are a few years too late. I would've loved to have them with real leather instead of the synthetic that is guaranteed to be on them.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

vood99

Registered Member

Posts: 2,130

#308 [url]

Jul 13 12 11:26 AM

NikeDealer wrote:

I actually like the question posed: Would putting Nike Air on an inferior product make you purchase it any quicker or ignore the quality...

That alone could be its own thread and Im sure the answers would be startling.

Touching on the running dept for Nike.. trust me when I say they are FAR more interested in the running looks than performance. When I first heard no one in running some years back had EVER been a runner.. I was like damn. Really? I know you dont have to play basketball to design a great LOOKING shoe.. BUT if you did it may help you design a GREAT PERFORMING shoe.

I.E. Dwayne Edwards was OFT criticized for his Jordan kicks not looking like Jordans.....but if you EVER put your foot into ANY of his shoes it was like heaven on the feet. Dwayne Played at the same High School as Paul Pierce (before him) and still plays to this day at a high level... He understood what a Basketball Player needed in a shoe.

It would help to have a runner not just a runners feedback when designing a shoe. My opinion only.
Rock thanks for the knowledge on DE - you're right, his shoes were excellent in terms of comfort but they might have been over-engineered with the shrouds, magnets and 'chrome' trim.

Your comments on Nike running are just mind blowing - is it just a matter of taking an exising midsole/outsole combo, slapping on an upper and calling it a day?

On the subject of JB/Nike Air - there will be a handful of people who won't even give the Nike Air product a second look but the sheep will buy them, complain about them and buy the next release too.

Quote    Reply   

#309 [url]

Jul 13 12 11:49 AM

vood99 wrote:
ThorrocksJs wrote:
Nike wasted umbro and cole haan sadly.The lunar soled shoes were interesting stuff but it was just a fancy ripoff of the Mark Mcnairy shoes that are being copied anywhere.Nike is also wasting the converse line completely converse should be doing way better than this .They should have retroed the olympic models Maguc and Bird wore.I agree rock Bobbito might not be the best guy to oversee or have direct input in the design recess but he would do great working with the older bball kicks like the dunk,terminator,af1,legend,dynasty etc.
Thorrocks, I agree that Jeremy Scott needs to be fired and his entire 'line' trashed. I'm guessing your an older cat just by the fact you dropped Bobbito's name and yeah, if anyone's

synonymous with Nike and Hip/Hop he'd be a good choice for a collaboration. But I'm not sure what he could bring to the table seeing as NSW will ensure that the quality remains doo doo. Additionally NSW would make the releases extremely hard for the average consumer to acquire.

Converse is just an afterthought to Nike - their inline product and their retro product are both trash. The former lacks design and quality while the latter just lacks quality. Absolute shame seeing as they have such a rich history - I wouldn't be surprised if they were 'unloaded' down the road due to them underperforming.



  
Bob's cool, has a connection with the entertainment industry, old enough to know what sneakers should be. His Air Force 1 line for Nike was unparalleled in regard to quality, as was his Pro Keds Royal Suede lineup. 

However, all Adidas needs to do, is get to a kick butt ad firm to start talking about all of the really hip and functional products they make. Serious quality over there, severely underrated performance wise. However too often, apparently wearing everything Nike is some sort of aphrodisiac for a fool and his money, but if the futures are correct, that seems to be changing. Jeremy Scott really does not effect anything, as he fills the niche side of Adidas, a very small market.  

In regard to Converse, I really think that Nike grabbed them in order to eliminate the competition. This same thing happens in the brokerage industry. A few years before being purchased, Converse released a study that suggested that the kind of shoes that Nike makes, were bad for your feet. Converse put out a retraction, then soon after, Nike bought the company. Now, you cannot even find the article on line, and trust me, I have SEARCHED for it.

Now with Reebok, well, I think that Adidas possibly has bitten off more than they can chew there. However, they did get the NBA from that deal, and with future possibilities that are just beginning to be explored by Swizz and his crew, they may be able to 'splay some swag here and there, but it all depends on Nike continuously shooting themselves in the swoosh...smiley: laugh







  

Quote    Reply   
avatar

finnns2003

Registered Member

Posts: 22,815

#310 [url]

Jul 13 12 2:40 PM

AKALONGSTROKE wrote:
Do you want the truth, or do you simply want a sugar coated response?

For those who don't need sweetener, gimmick.

For those who do, oh I am certain that if you buy enough bands, that you'll find a couple that will work for you, just like with the Nike + system. 
Disappointing.

finnns, I'd venture that you're paying the price for being an early adopter along with the fact that most people just use the things as fashion accessories so they may not know or care that the devices don't function as intended.
Yeah, which ruins it for people who actually do workout. No worries, I just sold the latest replacement for close to retail...

I'm guessing Nike will surely but slowly, release new features in version 2, 3, etc. Unlike the iPod, the first version has to work first, and work well. Here they advertised this product as revolutionary, and one of the biggest marketing blitzes I've seen in some time. Only to disappoint many with awful batteries, broken sensors, and cheap bracelet components (I had all 3 issues).

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
avatar

secretzofwar

Registered Member

Posts: 3,700

#312 [url]

Jul 13 12 7:50 PM

I suspect AKA hasn't looked at market share numbers in a while. Check Nike running vs the competition. Check Nike Basketball vs the competition.

Nike has made a drastic turnaround in the running community and is now just eradicating its former negative perception.

98/100 top-selling shoes in the US last week were...Nike or Jordan.

You can quote all you want about adidas or Under Armour or Propulsion Labs making better products, but at the end of the day, it's about the P&L...which is still intact.

I think the tariff hit earnings by about $0.18 per share, and now Nike has recovered most of its loss. The sell-side got overly optimistic and set expectations unrealistically high. And Nike isn't selling off Umbro and Cole Haan because it "needs" the money. Frankly, both brands suck, and Nike realize Nike soccer > Umbro.

There are chinks in the armor, but you can say the same thing about Apple, Nike, Visa or any dominate company.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

NikeDealer.niketalk

Registered Member

Posts: 1,203

#313 [url]

Jul 13 12 8:05 PM

Great point Secretz... I was going to mention the Umbro situation but its pretty self explanatory. Nike soccer grew something fierce on its own... and its been doing QUITE well... Umbro was brought in to potentially help the business and Nike Soccer has outgrown that.

Good decision I'd say.

Hey AKA.. when you said the old guy.. who did you mean Perez or Parker?

By the way.. Parker is VERY involved in the design process all around Nike and not by saying he wants to see it along the way.. but being a former Designer himself and growing through the company the guy knows his stuff.

Obviously hes no Phil....but who is? Phil intentionally moved his office from down the hall from Mark's so it wouldn't be that perverbial shadown lurking over him.

Quote    Reply   

#314 [url]

Jul 13 12 8:59 PM

secretzofwar wrote:
I suspect AKA hasn't looked at market share numbers in a while. Check Nike running vs the competition. Check Nike Basketball vs the competition.

Nike has made a drastic turnaround in the running community and is now just eradicating its former negative perception.

98/100 top-selling shoes in the US last week were...Nike or Jordan.

You can quote all you want about adidas or Under Armour or Propulsion Labs making better products, but at the end of the day, it's about the P&L...which is still intact.

I think the tariff hit earnings by about $0.18 per share, and now Nike has recovered most of its loss. The sell-side got overly optimistic and set expectations unrealistically high. And Nike isn't selling off Umbro and Cole Haan because it "needs" the money. Frankly, both brands suck, and Nike realize Nike soccer > Umbro.

There are chinks in the armor, but you can say the same thing about Apple, Nike, Visa or any dominate company.
Nike Basketball's main competition is Jordan Brand, and last anyone has looked, Jordan is constantly kicking their !!$@+.

The P&L isn't going to remain intact, not as long as stuff like this continue to happen.....

Elite, 'eh?

But Nike Running turning it around, revamping its image?

Well all that means is that they haven't done it just yet, now doesn't it? They are still beneath the big boys of running.

Mr. Deep,

I am talking about the gent who took over at Nike, when Puxatony Phil took a break.



Last Edited By: AKALONGSTROKE Jul 13 12 9:04 PM. Edited 2 times.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

secretzofwar

Registered Member

Posts: 3,700

#315 [url]

Jul 13 12 10:30 PM

Jordan is a Nike company though so it doesn't really matter.

I destroyed my ankle in Rose 2.5s thus adidas sucks??

Checkout running market share and what kicks all of the casual runners in large cities are rocking... Nike is killing it.

Quote    Reply   

#316 [url]

Jul 13 12 11:05 PM

secretzofwar wrote:
Jordan is a Nike company though so it doesn't really matter.

I destroyed my ankle in Rose 2.5s thus adidas sucks??

Checkout running market share and what kicks all of the casual runners in large cities are rocking... Nike is killing it.

True, Jordan is a Nike company, no doubt. However, Jordan Brand carries the Basketball brand, not Nike basketball. Jordan himself knows this, thus the Jumpman, not the swoosh, on the back of his shoes. Trust, Jordan leaves Nike, it's over. He has threatened to do so in the past, but didn't. Perhaps a nice little restructuring would put things in their proper perspective.

In regard to making the claim that all Adidas being bad due to Rose's injury, well, you are correct. Knowing how de_conditioning occurs in athletes that weren't properly conditioned in the first place, many injuries are simply structural, then coming from fatigue, but that wasn't my point with the gif.

The current crop of Nike Basketball shoes are so second rate, that they breakdown as quickly as toilet paper if they are hit right, thus the clip up above, and stuff like this...  

These are Lebron's PERSONAL pair, not the GR, and you mean to tell me that you guys could not get the swoosh right, keeping it on, at least on his pair???

You've got to be kidding me!

I guess you can claim consistency at two hundred fifty dollars......

but not quality.

BTW, in regard to those casual runners, you are really describing mall walkers. So you aren't saying much there...but a sale is a sale!

Quote    Reply   
avatar

ThorrocksJs.niketalk

Registered Member

Posts: 1,950

#317 [url]

Jul 14 12 12:11 AM

vood99 wrote:
ThorrocksJs wrote:
Nike wasted umbro and cole haan sadly.The lunar soled shoes were interesting stuff but it was just a fancy ripoff of the Mark Mcnairy shoes that are being copied anywhere.Nike is also wasting the converse line completely converse should be doing way better than this .They should have retroed the olympic models Maguc and Bird wore.I agree rock Bobbito might not be the best guy to oversee or have direct input in the design recess but he would do great working with the older bball kicks like the dunk,terminator,af1,legend,dynasty etc.
Thorrocks, I agree that Jeremy Scott needs to be fired and his entire 'line' trashed. I'm guessing your an older cat just by the fact you dropped Bobbito's name and yeah, if anyone's

synonymous with Nike and Hip/Hop he'd be a good choice for a collaboration. But I'm not sure what he could bring to the table seeing as NSW will ensure that the quality remains doo doo. Additionally NSW would make the releases extremely hard for the average consumer to acquire.

Converse is just an afterthought to Nike - their inline product and their retro product are both trash. The former lacks design and quality while the latter just lacks quality. Absolute shame seeing as they have such a rich history - I wouldn't be surprised if they were 'unloaded' down the road due to them underperforming.



  


Older nah I'm 19 (second youngest nter behind scschift ) I love sneakers and sport culture I look and approach sneakers the way car and wine aficionados appreciate their ferraris and Merlots.Ive read and wrote about the industry and sports since I was 13 .Ive been friends with bobbito since I was 14 real cool guy and he is always dropping knowledge .Interviewed him back in the day . The use of too many synthetics is killing the sig line Kobe hasn't an original shoe In years now lebron and I'd are following suit.Nike no longer sells you a lifestyle with their products .The shoes aren't milestones nor commemorate moments in the players life or career.They don't feel Nor look like the shoes of champions .synthetics will never truly trump leather aka the oldes and most durable material in the history of humanities footwear .Leathet is great for the structural integrity because it warps with heat protects you from the elements,higher quality last longer .Your selling kids shoes made of polymers n plastic that won't last a season on court or training .

Quote    Reply   
avatar

secretzofwar

Registered Member

Posts: 3,700

#318 [url]

Jul 14 12 12:33 PM

AKALONGSTROKE wrote:
secretzofwar wrote:
Jordan is a Nike company though so it doesn't really matter.

I destroyed my ankle in Rose 2.5s thus adidas sucks??

Checkout running market share and what kicks all of the casual runners in large cities are rocking... Nike is killing it.

True, Jordan is a Nike company, no doubt. However, Jordan Brand carries the Basketball brand, not Nike basketball. Jordan himself knows this, thus the Jumpman, not the swoosh, on the back of his shoes. Trust, Jordan leaves Nike, it's over. He has threatened to do so in the past, but didn't. Perhaps a nice little restructuring would put things in their proper perspective.

In regard to making the claim that all Adidas being bad due to Rose's injury, well, you are correct. Knowing how de_conditioning occurs in athletes that weren't properly conditioned in the first place, many injuries are simply structural, then coming from fatigue, but that wasn't my point with the gif.

The current crop of Nike Basketball shoes are so second rate, that they breakdown as quickly as toilet paper if they are hit right, thus the clip up above, and stuff like this...  

These are Lebron's PERSONAL pair, not the GR, and you mean to tell me that you guys could not get the swoosh right, keeping it on, at least on his pair???

You've got to be kidding me!

I guess you can claim consistency at two hundred fifty dollars......

but not quality.

BTW, in regard to those casual runners, you are really describing mall walkers. So you aren't saying much there...but a sale is a sale!

I've got no argument about the quality/durability issue. This year I've bought 2 adidas basketball shoes and 1 pair of Nike basketball shoes. The Rose 2/2.5's both hold up really well, though I'm not a fan at all of the stability. I thought 2011 was a weak year for basketball products in general, though I haven't tried on the Fly Wade's or Melo 8's, which I've heard good things about. LeBron IX is an extremely mediocre basketball shoe, and the Kobe VII is awful.

I don't think MJ is really worried about his $30-$50m annual annuity stream from Nike.

As for the casual runner, I'm referencing the hundreds of people I see running down Lake Shore Drive in Chicago every day. These are people, like myself, who run 10-15 miles per week (I'd say this is the majority of "runners"). Now, whether or not these 45 year old moms should be running in Nike Frees...I don't know. What I do know is they are wearing Nike hats, Nike jackets, Nike shoes, and Lululemon pants or Tempo shorts.

From Matt Powell over at SportsOneSource

“Running remained a strong category even as sales improved about +10% in units and dollars.  Nike Running sales grew in the low singles and took 54% share. Reebok Running doubled and share nearly doubled to 11%.  Asics grew in the low singles as share hit 11.5%. New Balance declined in the mid singles while Adidas grew in the high singles.  Under Armour Running doubled and share hit 1.3%.  The Core Running brands (Saucony, Mizuno and Brooks) all had solid performances.

As we have seen for a while Lightweight is now cannibalizing the traditional Running categories.  Stability declined in the high singles and Cushioning in the low singles.  Lightweight Running grew about 75% and represented 30% of all Running shoes sold for the quarter. In Lightweight Nike has a 45% share, Reebok 32%, and Adidas 5%.

Minimalist Running (a subset of Lightweight) grew more than double for the quarter, and represented about 9% of all Running.  Nike has 71% share of minimal driven by the Free franchise.  Vibram, Merrell, New balance, Asics and Saucony each have about a 5% share.”



Quote    Reply   

#319 [url]

Jul 15 12 11:14 AM

secretzofwar wrote:
AKALONGSTROKE wrote:
secretzofwar wrote:
Jordan is a Nike company though so it doesn't really matter.

I destroyed my ankle in Rose 2.5s thus adidas sucks??

Checkout running market share and what kicks all of the casual runners in large cities are rocking... Nike is killing it.

True, Jordan is a Nike company, no doubt. However, Jordan Brand carries the Basketball brand, not Nike basketball. Jordan himself knows this, thus the Jumpman, not the swoosh, on the back of his shoes. Trust, Jordan leaves Nike, it's over. He has threatened to do so in the past, but didn't. Perhaps a nice little restructuring would put things in their proper perspective.

In regard to making the claim that all Adidas being bad due to Rose's injury, well, you are correct. Knowing how de_conditioning occurs in athletes that weren't properly conditioned in the first place, many injuries are simply structural, then coming from fatigue, but that wasn't my point with the gif.

The current crop of Nike Basketball shoes are so second rate, that they breakdown as quickly as toilet paper if they are hit right, thus the clip up above, and stuff like this...  

These are Lebron's PERSONAL pair, not the GR, and you mean to tell me that you guys could not get the swoosh right, keeping it on, at least on his pair???

You've got to be kidding me!

I guess you can claim consistency at two hundred fifty dollars......

but not quality.

BTW, in regard to those casual runners, you are really describing mall walkers. So you aren't saying much there...but a sale is a sale!

I've got no argument about the quality/durability issue. This year I've bought 2 adidas basketball shoes and 1 pair of Nike basketball shoes. The Rose 2/2.5's both hold up really well, though I'm not a fan at all of the stability. I thought 2011 was a weak year for basketball products in general, though I haven't tried on the Fly Wade's or Melo 8's, which I've heard good things about. LeBron IX is an extremely mediocre basketball shoe, and the Kobe VII is awful.

I don't think MJ is really worried about his $30-$50m annual annuity stream from Nike.

As for the casual runner, I'm referencing the hundreds of people I see running down Lake Shore Drive in Chicago every day. These are people, like myself, who run 10-15 miles per week (I'd say this is the majority of "runners"). Now, whether or not these 45 year old moms should be running in Nike Frees...I don't know. What I do know is they are wearing Nike hats, Nike jackets, Nike shoes, and Lululemon pants or Tempo shorts.

From Matt Powell over at SportsOneSource

“Running remained a strong category even as sales improved about +10% in units and dollars.  Nike Running sales grew in the low singles and took 54% share. Reebok Running doubled and share nearly doubled to 11%.  Asics grew in the low singles as share hit 11.5%. New Balance declined in the mid singles while Adidas grew in the high singles.  Under Armour Running doubled and share hit 1.3%.  The Core Running brands (Saucony, Mizuno and Brooks) all had solid performances.

As we have seen for a while Lightweight is now cannibalizing the traditional Running categories.  Stability declined in the high singles and Cushioning in the low singles.  Lightweight Running grew about 75% and represented 30% of all Running shoes sold for the quarter. In Lightweight Nike has a 45% share, Reebok 32%, and Adidas 5%.

Minimalist Running (a subset of Lightweight) grew more than double for the quarter, and represented about 9% of all Running.  Nike has 71% share of minimal driven by the Free franchise.  Vibram, Merrell, New balance, Asics and Saucony each have about a 5% share.”



The problem that I have with the SportsOneSource quote is that it does not, then could not, indicate who is buying the gear, and then for what purpose. I am certain that you'll see the people that you've mentioned running in Nike gear in Chi Town, and that does speak to sales. I cannot argue how Nike is incredibly visible, they make that a priority, one that would serve Adidas well if they've ever wake up and realize that you must be SEEN, in order to capitalize on a market that is ripe to be taken over.

But my issue with Nike, then always has been, is that they are about hype, not quality. Their running line is available everywhere, and if you don't know any better, you'd think that since they've started out as a running company, they'd know running shoes. But for serious runners, those that I pay attention to, they know this to not be the case. I am the same way about kicks for hoops. I can point to one or two recent kicks from Nike that are hip, serious balling shoes, but if you listen to the crowd, like those who are here, those who've never played at a high level other than while gaming, Nike basketball can do no wrong.

Those of us who ball, then are not sneakerheads, know better.

But since Nike is everywhere, then available to everyone, of course the perception, through sales mind you, that Nike is the best.  

Well, using that line of reasoning, McDonald's makes the best food all over the world as well.

Quote    Reply   
avatar

Brandon3000

Registered Member

Posts: 11,665

#320 [url]

Jul 15 12 11:22 AM

this guy is answering a lot of good questions

Quote    Reply   
Remove this ad
Add Reply

Quick Reply

bbcode help