Jump to content

***Return to Metlife Thread***


Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, Maxman said:

We live in a first come, first serve world. You are basically complaining about a long walk.

I get there at 8 and I park in the back of the lot to be left alone.  The walk isn't bad.  The bigger problem with getting there at noon is the traffic.

My Dad and I went for years, started in 1988. We didn't have much of a tailgate. We would usually get there about 10:30am. We would stop on the way, grab some sandwiches. Neither of us were drinking and we would just chat, catch up on life and people watch.  And that is seriously some of the best memories I have.

It's more than a long walk.  If you arrive at the stadium 60 minutes before kickoff the traffic backs up half a mile on Rt. 3, not only will you stress for 45 minutes just to find a spot in a lot, after you get directed to the outer edges of Pegasus you then have to sprint to get to your seat before kickoff.  And this year with no middle tier that keeps non-season ticket holders packed in to the parking deck thus spilling out into the main lots, it's going to be so much worse.

I propose that 1/3 of the lots in the stadium, the ones behind and in front of Pegasus, be deemed "tailgate only" lots with their own specific entrance.  Plenty of space for everyone into that sort of thing.  RV's, pickup trucks, vans, school buses, cars, have at it.  Open it at 8AM.  What a party!  Nothing but tailgaters.  Foul language encouraged.  The uglier the attire the better.  Take up as many spots as you'd like.  Throw your footballs, smash some windshields.  Piss on all the Fords and Chevys.  Leave your trash on the ground to feed the gulls.  No attitude from others.  No snide looks.  Just outdoor sports bar heaven.

Then leave 2/3 of the lots as "no tailgating" lots, open them at 11AM, no special vehicles, just the typical sedans and SUV's, one spot per car strictly enforced.  Then people like me who find the game itself the primary attraction can glide on in at Noon and have a comfortable amount of time to walk to our seats.

Doing it this way makes everyone happy.  Tailgaters are left alone and have a massive party.  Regular fans are left alone and don't have to get to the stadium 3 hours early because a handful are causing a parking and traffic nightmare.

SAR I

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 150
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

It will be 100% attendance with tailgating by September. The Jets have 9 home games. I am smelling 7 and 2 at home. Or maybe that is the urine. I am not sure.

Yes, definitely time for this thread.  A mere 4 months away from preseason game #1.  With it so close, no way this will possibly get derailed like all of the other Covid related threads.   I've h

True story I have to share.  Many years ago when I had season tickets we had an event at the firehouse the night before. We tapped another 1/2 keg very late and the next morning the trustees want

Posted Images

13 minutes ago, SAR I said:

It's more than a long walk.  If you arrive at the stadium 60 minutes before kickoff the traffic backs up half a mile on Rt. 3, not only will you stress for 45 minutes just to find a spot in a lot, after you get directed to the outer edges of Pegasus you then have to sprint to get to your seat before kickoff.  And this year with no middle tier that keeps non-season ticket holders packed in to the parking deck thus spilling out into the main lots, it's going to be so much worse.

I propose that 1/3 of the lots in the stadium, the ones behind and in front of Pegasus, be deemed "tailgate only" lots with their own specific entrance.  Plenty of space for everyone into that sort of thing.  RV's, pickup trucks, vans, school buses, cars, have at it.  Open it at 8AM.  What a party!  Nothing but tailgaters.  Foul language encouraged.  The uglier the attire the better.  Take up as many spots as you'd like.  Throw your footballs, smash some windshields.  Piss on all the Fords and Chevys.  Leave your trash on the ground to feed the gulls.  No attitude from others.  No snide looks.  Just outdoor sports bar heaven.

Then leave 2/3 of the lots as "no tailgating" lots, open them at 11AM, no special vehicles, just the typical sedans and SUV's, one spot per car strictly enforced.  Then people like me who find the game itself the primary attraction can glide on in at Noon and have a comfortable amount of time to walk to our seats.

Doing it this way makes everyone happy.  Tailgaters are left alone and have a massive party.  Regular fans are left alone and don't have to get to the stadium 3 hours early because a handful are causing a parking and traffic nightmare.

SAR I

So you are also asking for a VIP lane off of the turnpike or route 3 I guess.

You are going to an event with 80,000 people. When you get there kind of early, you are late.  The tailgating lot wouldn't help if you are stuck on route 3.

Also there are like 4 people in total that want this. So, good luck.  :)

  • Upvote 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Maxman said:

So you are also asking for a VIP lane off of the turnpike or route 3 I guess.

You are going to an event with 80,000 people. When you get there kind of early, you are late.  The tailgating lot wouldn't help if you are stuck on route 3.

Also there are like 4 people in total that want this. So, good luck.  :)

We live in a world of convenience and we live in a world where fewer and fewer people want to attend live NFL games because it's inconvenient.  That's a reality.  I don't need rewards points that get me bobblehead dolls and I don't need three types of bacon-on-a-stick in a spacious food court.  What I need is the ability to arrive at the lot 60 minutes before kickoff without having to stress out in a line stretching to Route 3.

If we can pick up a phone and get an Uber to bring us dinner, if we can vaccinate half the state in a few months, we can figure out a way to reimagine the parking lots at MetLife Stadium.  It's not convenient to get to the stadium 3 hours before a game.  That's a problem that needs solving.  I think its because tailgating is allowed to occur anywhere it wants.  And I think this year with the new parking tiers its going to show just how big this problem really is.

SAR I

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SAR I said:

We live in a world of convenience and we live in a world where fewer and fewer people want to attend live NFL games because it's inconvenient.  That's a reality.  I don't need rewards points that get me bobblehead dolls and I don't need three types of bacon-on-a-stick in a spacious food court.  What I need is the ability to arrive at the lot 60 minutes before kickoff without having to stress out in a line stretching to Route 3.

If we can pick up a phone and get an Uber to bring us dinner, if we can vaccinate half the state in a few months, we can figure out a way to reimagine the parking lots at MetLife Stadium.  It's not convenient to get to the stadium 3 hours before a game.  That's a problem that needs solving.  I think its because tailgating is allowed to occur anywhere it wants.  And I think this year with the new parking tiers its going to show just how big this problem really is.

SAR I

We live in a world were mass events haven't been allowed.

Now that things are returning back to normal your statement is becoming less true.

If people wanted what you described the jets would offer it. Nobody is asking for it.

Most people don't care if someone steps on their lawn.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully Metlife will be in the rear-view mirror in a few years.  I know it's an old article, but it makes a lot of sense, way more than Metlife did.

2026 New Jets Stadium
Ira Hernowitz

Jan 12, 2020·


There is no franchise in sports like the New York Jets. Uniquely, they have NEVER had their own stadium, which is unprecedented in major US sports history (now that the Raiders are moving to Las Vegas). From sharing Shea to renting at Giants Stadium to their current 50/50 split of MetLife Stadium, this is the start of an identity crisis this franchise has faced outside of Joe Namath and their Super Bowl III upset win (when almost every football team shared a baseball stadium).

MetLife is by far the best situation the organization has been in, but it is in no way the BEST possible solution for the team. In fact, only eleven years after opening, the time is right now for the Jets to begin the process of moving forward to build their own stadium, in New York City, to begin play in 2026.

The problems with MetLife are not surprising since you had to accommodate the requirements of two teams with competing visions for what a great stadium should be. The simple requirements of compromise created a generic stadium, built more for functionality than ambiance. However, the environment is only part of the problem.

First and foremost, it is too big. With over 82,000 seats, it will be the largest NFL stadium once the LA Coliseum is retired when the Rams move in 2020. While capacity was important in 1976, the fact is that times have changed dramatically. Quality of seating is important, as is scarcity, given that the real value of a ticket is now measured in the secondary market. MetLife has about 55,000 quality seats, and an upper bowl with thousands of low value seats. They have poor sight lines, are far from the field, and it is really the only stadium built in the last 20 years for football that built these upper level end zone seats.

This situation was part of the Giants compromise. The Giants wanted to replicate the bowl configuration of Giants Stadium, and they also wanted more seats to satisfy the long waiting list they had. The Jets on the other hand designed the West Side Stadium with fewer seats and no upper end zone seats.

In reality, even the West Side Stadium at 75,000 proposed seats was too large. 60,000 to 65,000 seats would in reality produce more revenue than the 82,000 seats they have now. Considering the aftermarket (which teams get a cut of) and the increased scarcity by reducing capacity, on top of making all the available seats better would have a positive effect on revenue.

A second issue is the coaches club section. While the idea and revenue associated with super premium seats makes sense, MetLife and Yankee Stadium have the same problem…the most visible seats on television are often empty. If the fans are eating at the buffet, staying out of the cold, or the seats are unsold, it is a visible eyesore that has to be an embarrassment to Jets management every week.

Beyond these issues, the stadium offers little in the way of “cool”. While this is subjective, it is simply a pretty generic stadium. There is no signature element of the stadium to identify with, which again is part of the compromise.

Finally, to build a stadium without a retractable roof in the Northeast is beyond comprehension. Forget fan comfort, the revenue opportunities of a retractable roof stadium in the New York market are almost reason alone to build it. Super Bowls, bowl games, 365 days of concerts and events…this is a no brainer. The West Side proposal was a retractable roof, which at the time was estimated to cost $200-$300 million, and was being picked up by the city. Of course, this was part of why Jim Dolan was so opposed to the stadium, he knew how much business it could take from MSG.

The facts are clear…a generic stadium, with lots of low value seats, with no roof and little ambiance should be a no brainer to replace. It appears the Jets knew this as the lease has some interesting out clauses starting in 2025, a mere 16 years after opening.

So the lease has an out, and the stadium issues are well documented. The big question is can it be done?

The first issue in building a new stadium is financial. There is no question a new retractable roof dome stadium in NY starts at $2bn and probably gets closer to $3bn.

Considering the Jets had to finance their share of MetLife (about $540 million per Forbes), and they have taken a bath on PSL’s, that’s a lot of debt to take on. A deeper look however suggests it is very doable.

First, let’s start with overall value of the business. Forbes currently estimates the value of the Jets at $3.2bn. So in the 20 years of owning the team, the Johnson’s parlayed a $635m investment and have realized a 5x return. That valuation is based on owning 50% of MetLife, so it would not be unreasonable to estimate their valuation with 100% ownership of a retractable roof stadium in NYC would increase by at least $1bn, so conservatively the team would be worth $4.2bn.

On the debit side of the equation is the debt on MetLife. If the Jets offered the Giants the opportunity to own 100% of MetLife in exchange for the remaining debt the Jets have, I imagine they would jump at it. If they didn’t, the Jets could sell their share of the stadium LLC, which I am sure would motivate the Giants to snap it up.

In this scenario, you have a business worth $4.2bn with only the debt remaining on the financing of the original purchase (which really shouldn’t be more than $100m unless the Jets have tapped into the equity). Not to play CFO, but finding financing in this scenario should be pretty simple. If you consider that the debt on MetLife was upgraded because of the consistency of the revenue, a new Jets stadium would have banks lining up to lend the money.

So now that there is a path to finance a stadium, where do you build it? While the West Side project had some upside, the location was never ideal. Public transportation was poor (solved since by the 7 train extension), and parking was impossible, making tailgating obsolete.

The easiest answer is in Queens, adjacent to Citi Field. I know most people like to talk about the Jets being a Queens/LI fan base, but I don’t buy that. The team has been in NJ longer than they were in Queens, and no sport is as regional as the NFL. Winning makes for fans, just look at how teams like the Steelers, Cowboys, and Patriots pack fans into opposing stadiums. It’s not that the fans “travel well” exclusively, but there are thousands of fans of most teams in every major city.

The reasons for Queens are simple. There is ample space, public transit is in place, parking is no problem. One only has to drive 90 minutes down the NJ Turnpike to see a complex that works in Philadelphia. Side by side baseball and football stadiums maximize the space and just makes sense.

In addition to all of this, the area surrounding Citi Field is under significant change. In fact, it is really one of last opportunities for significant development in the five boroughs.

Imagine a hybrid of Patriots Place in Foxboro or the stadium district in San Francisco, retail and housing development spurred by stadium development.

Given the investment in the Atlantic Health training center as the home of the Jets, would a stadium move to Queens require the Jets relocate yet again. Simply put, no. NFL teams stay in hotels before every game, home and away. Finding a creative way to get the team from NJ to Queens (Probably less than 30 miles as the crow flies) quickly, be it bus, ferry, or train should be doable.

The only real question is Jets ownership. Do they want to take this leap? While it has some inherent risk and a lot of moving parts, I think it is ultimately a risk where the upside far outweighs the downside.

On the business side, it adds enterprise value to the business. It creates new revenue opportunities for the Jets. It potentially wipes the stink of the PSL disaster away from the fan base.

On the fan side, it creates the opportunity for a better, more compelling game environment. The stadium could have some signature elements, and create a true home field advantage.

Finally, it solves the identity void that this organization has been looking to fill since Namath wagged his finger in Miami. Woody and Christopher, this is the opportunity.


https://medium.com/@Ihernowitz/there-is-no-franchise-in-sports-like-the-new-york-jets-6bbf999529c0

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Jetworks said:

Hopefully Metlife will be in the rear-view mirror in a few years.  I know it's an old article, but it makes a lot of sense, way more than Metlife did.

2026 New Jets Stadium
Ira Hernowitz

Jan 12, 2020·


There is no franchise in sports like the New York Jets. Uniquely, they have NEVER had their own stadium, which is unprecedented in major US sports history (now that the Raiders are moving to Las Vegas). From sharing Shea to renting at Giants Stadium to their current 50/50 split of MetLife Stadium, this is the start of an identity crisis this franchise has faced outside of Joe Namath and their Super Bowl III upset win (when almost every football team shared a baseball stadium).

MetLife is by far the best situation the organization has been in, but it is in no way the BEST possible solution for the team. In fact, only eleven years after opening, the time is right now for the Jets to begin the process of moving forward to build their own stadium, in New York City, to begin play in 2026.

The problems with MetLife are not surprising since you had to accommodate the requirements of two teams with competing visions for what a great stadium should be. The simple requirements of compromise created a generic stadium, built more for functionality than ambiance. However, the environment is only part of the problem.

First and foremost, it is too big. With over 82,000 seats, it will be the largest NFL stadium once the LA Coliseum is retired when the Rams move in 2020. While capacity was important in 1976, the fact is that times have changed dramatically. Quality of seating is important, as is scarcity, given that the real value of a ticket is now measured in the secondary market. MetLife has about 55,000 quality seats, and an upper bowl with thousands of low value seats. They have poor sight lines, are far from the field, and it is really the only stadium built in the last 20 years for football that built these upper level end zone seats.

This situation was part of the Giants compromise. The Giants wanted to replicate the bowl configuration of Giants Stadium, and they also wanted more seats to satisfy the long waiting list they had. The Jets on the other hand designed the West Side Stadium with fewer seats and no upper end zone seats.

In reality, even the West Side Stadium at 75,000 proposed seats was too large. 60,000 to 65,000 seats would in reality produce more revenue than the 82,000 seats they have now. Considering the aftermarket (which teams get a cut of) and the increased scarcity by reducing capacity, on top of making all the available seats better would have a positive effect on revenue.

A second issue is the coaches club section. While the idea and revenue associated with super premium seats makes sense, MetLife and Yankee Stadium have the same problem…the most visible seats on television are often empty. If the fans are eating at the buffet, staying out of the cold, or the seats are unsold, it is a visible eyesore that has to be an embarrassment to Jets management every week.

Beyond these issues, the stadium offers little in the way of “cool”. While this is subjective, it is simply a pretty generic stadium. There is no signature element of the stadium to identify with, which again is part of the compromise.

Finally, to build a stadium without a retractable roof in the Northeast is beyond comprehension. Forget fan comfort, the revenue opportunities of a retractable roof stadium in the New York market are almost reason alone to build it. Super Bowls, bowl games, 365 days of concerts and events…this is a no brainer. The West Side proposal was a retractable roof, which at the time was estimated to cost $200-$300 million, and was being picked up by the city. Of course, this was part of why Jim Dolan was so opposed to the stadium, he knew how much business it could take from MSG.

The facts are clear…a generic stadium, with lots of low value seats, with no roof and little ambiance should be a no brainer to replace. It appears the Jets knew this as the lease has some interesting out clauses starting in 2025, a mere 16 years after opening.

So the lease has an out, and the stadium issues are well documented. The big question is can it be done?

The first issue in building a new stadium is financial. There is no question a new retractable roof dome stadium in NY starts at $2bn and probably gets closer to $3bn.

Considering the Jets had to finance their share of MetLife (about $540 million per Forbes), and they have taken a bath on PSL’s, that’s a lot of debt to take on. A deeper look however suggests it is very doable.

First, let’s start with overall value of the business. Forbes currently estimates the value of the Jets at $3.2bn. So in the 20 years of owning the team, the Johnson’s parlayed a $635m investment and have realized a 5x return. That valuation is based on owning 50% of MetLife, so it would not be unreasonable to estimate their valuation with 100% ownership of a retractable roof stadium in NYC would increase by at least $1bn, so conservatively the team would be worth $4.2bn.

On the debit side of the equation is the debt on MetLife. If the Jets offered the Giants the opportunity to own 100% of MetLife in exchange for the remaining debt the Jets have, I imagine they would jump at it. If they didn’t, the Jets could sell their share of the stadium LLC, which I am sure would motivate the Giants to snap it up.

In this scenario, you have a business worth $4.2bn with only the debt remaining on the financing of the original purchase (which really shouldn’t be more than $100m unless the Jets have tapped into the equity). Not to play CFO, but finding financing in this scenario should be pretty simple. If you consider that the debt on MetLife was upgraded because of the consistency of the revenue, a new Jets stadium would have banks lining up to lend the money.

So now that there is a path to finance a stadium, where do you build it? While the West Side project had some upside, the location was never ideal. Public transportation was poor (solved since by the 7 train extension), and parking was impossible, making tailgating obsolete.

The easiest answer is in Queens, adjacent to Citi Field. I know most people like to talk about the Jets being a Queens/LI fan base, but I don’t buy that. The team has been in NJ longer than they were in Queens, and no sport is as regional as the NFL. Winning makes for fans, just look at how teams like the Steelers, Cowboys, and Patriots pack fans into opposing stadiums. It’s not that the fans “travel well” exclusively, but there are thousands of fans of most teams in every major city.

The reasons for Queens are simple. There is ample space, public transit is in place, parking is no problem. One only has to drive 90 minutes down the NJ Turnpike to see a complex that works in Philadelphia. Side by side baseball and football stadiums maximize the space and just makes sense.

In addition to all of this, the area surrounding Citi Field is under significant change. In fact, it is really one of last opportunities for significant development in the five boroughs.

Imagine a hybrid of Patriots Place in Foxboro or the stadium district in San Francisco, retail and housing development spurred by stadium development.

Given the investment in the Atlantic Health training center as the home of the Jets, would a stadium move to Queens require the Jets relocate yet again. Simply put, no. NFL teams stay in hotels before every game, home and away. Finding a creative way to get the team from NJ to Queens (Probably less than 30 miles as the crow flies) quickly, be it bus, ferry, or train should be doable.

The only real question is Jets ownership. Do they want to take this leap? While it has some inherent risk and a lot of moving parts, I think it is ultimately a risk where the upside far outweighs the downside.

On the business side, it adds enterprise value to the business. It creates new revenue opportunities for the Jets. It potentially wipes the stink of the PSL disaster away from the fan base.

On the fan side, it creates the opportunity for a better, more compelling game environment. The stadium could have some signature elements, and create a true home field advantage.

Finally, it solves the identity void that this organization has been looking to fill since Namath wagged his finger in Miami. Woody and Christopher, this is the opportunity.


https://medium.com/@Ihernowitz/there-is-no-franchise-in-sports-like-the-new-york-jets-6bbf999529c0
 

The article makes no sense.

If the Jets moved to Queens, myself and 80% ofthe fans from New Jersey would give up our season tickets immediately.  And Long Island is so much more crowded now than it was in 1983 that very few fans from that region would buy them either.

A dome would do nothing except remove our biggest homefield advantage-  the playoff cold and wind.  The Jets have won exactly 4 home playoff games in our history.  3 of them were against teams used to comfy warm conditions.

Jets fans are cheap and they don't show up even when tickets are less than $25 on a beautiful sunny day against an interesting opponent.  Without the Giants to cover half the expenses/losses and with fewer seats and a pricey dome, ticket prices will go up significantly.  The Jets haven't raised ticket prices in 14 years.  Jets fans talk a lot about what they want but they are unwilling to pay for it.

Lastly, the Jets are #2 in the entire NFL in attendance.  Proof-positive that how 'pretty' a stadium is doesn't mean anything to anyone.  Just look at the Mets with their gorgeous recreation of Ebbets Field.  They've been in Queens forever, many Mets fans are Jets fans, and they don't show up and they don't pay either.  The Jets aren't moving because there is no problem here, at least not a problem that Jets fans would pay more for.

SAR I

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Jetworks said:

Hopefully Metlife will be in the rear-view mirror in a few years.  I know it's an old article, but it makes a lot of sense, way more than Metlife did.

2026 New Jets Stadium
Ira Hernowitz

Jan 12, 2020·


There is no franchise in sports like the New York Jets. Uniquely, they have NEVER had their own stadium, which is unprecedented in major US sports history (now that the Raiders are moving to Las Vegas). From sharing Shea to renting at Giants Stadium to their current 50/50 split of MetLife Stadium, this is the start of an identity crisis this franchise has faced outside of Joe Namath and their Super Bowl III upset win (when almost every football team shared a baseball stadium).

MetLife is by far the best situation the organization has been in, but it is in no way the BEST possible solution for the team. In fact, only eleven years after opening, the time is right now for the Jets to begin the process of moving forward to build their own stadium, in New York City, to begin play in 2026.

The problems with MetLife are not surprising since you had to accommodate the requirements of two teams with competing visions for what a great stadium should be. The simple requirements of compromise created a generic stadium, built more for functionality than ambiance. However, the environment is only part of the problem.

First and foremost, it is too big. With over 82,000 seats, it will be the largest NFL stadium once the LA Coliseum is retired when the Rams move in 2020. While capacity was important in 1976, the fact is that times have changed dramatically. Quality of seating is important, as is scarcity, given that the real value of a ticket is now measured in the secondary market. MetLife has about 55,000 quality seats, and an upper bowl with thousands of low value seats. They have poor sight lines, are far from the field, and it is really the only stadium built in the last 20 years for football that built these upper level end zone seats.

This situation was part of the Giants compromise. The Giants wanted to replicate the bowl configuration of Giants Stadium, and they also wanted more seats to satisfy the long waiting list they had. The Jets on the other hand designed the West Side Stadium with fewer seats and no upper end zone seats.

In reality, even the West Side Stadium at 75,000 proposed seats was too large. 60,000 to 65,000 seats would in reality produce more revenue than the 82,000 seats they have now. Considering the aftermarket (which teams get a cut of) and the increased scarcity by reducing capacity, on top of making all the available seats better would have a positive effect on revenue.

A second issue is the coaches club section. While the idea and revenue associated with super premium seats makes sense, MetLife and Yankee Stadium have the same problem…the most visible seats on television are often empty. If the fans are eating at the buffet, staying out of the cold, or the seats are unsold, it is a visible eyesore that has to be an embarrassment to Jets management every week.

Beyond these issues, the stadium offers little in the way of “cool”. While this is subjective, it is simply a pretty generic stadium. There is no signature element of the stadium to identify with, which again is part of the compromise.

Finally, to build a stadium without a retractable roof in the Northeast is beyond comprehension. Forget fan comfort, the revenue opportunities of a retractable roof stadium in the New York market are almost reason alone to build it. Super Bowls, bowl games, 365 days of concerts and events…this is a no brainer. The West Side proposal was a retractable roof, which at the time was estimated to cost $200-$300 million, and was being picked up by the city. Of course, this was part of why Jim Dolan was so opposed to the stadium, he knew how much business it could take from MSG.

The facts are clear…a generic stadium, with lots of low value seats, with no roof and little ambiance should be a no brainer to replace. It appears the Jets knew this as the lease has some interesting out clauses starting in 2025, a mere 16 years after opening.

So the lease has an out, and the stadium issues are well documented. The big question is can it be done?

The first issue in building a new stadium is financial. There is no question a new retractable roof dome stadium in NY starts at $2bn and probably gets closer to $3bn.

Considering the Jets had to finance their share of MetLife (about $540 million per Forbes), and they have taken a bath on PSL’s, that’s a lot of debt to take on. A deeper look however suggests it is very doable.

First, let’s start with overall value of the business. Forbes currently estimates the value of the Jets at $3.2bn. So in the 20 years of owning the team, the Johnson’s parlayed a $635m investment and have realized a 5x return. That valuation is based on owning 50% of MetLife, so it would not be unreasonable to estimate their valuation with 100% ownership of a retractable roof stadium in NYC would increase by at least $1bn, so conservatively the team would be worth $4.2bn.

On the debit side of the equation is the debt on MetLife. If the Jets offered the Giants the opportunity to own 100% of MetLife in exchange for the remaining debt the Jets have, I imagine they would jump at it. If they didn’t, the Jets could sell their share of the stadium LLC, which I am sure would motivate the Giants to snap it up.

In this scenario, you have a business worth $4.2bn with only the debt remaining on the financing of the original purchase (which really shouldn’t be more than $100m unless the Jets have tapped into the equity). Not to play CFO, but finding financing in this scenario should be pretty simple. If you consider that the debt on MetLife was upgraded because of the consistency of the revenue, a new Jets stadium would have banks lining up to lend the money.

So now that there is a path to finance a stadium, where do you build it? While the West Side project had some upside, the location was never ideal. Public transportation was poor (solved since by the 7 train extension), and parking was impossible, making tailgating obsolete.

The easiest answer is in Queens, adjacent to Citi Field. I know most people like to talk about the Jets being a Queens/LI fan base, but I don’t buy that. The team has been in NJ longer than they were in Queens, and no sport is as regional as the NFL. Winning makes for fans, just look at how teams like the Steelers, Cowboys, and Patriots pack fans into opposing stadiums. It’s not that the fans “travel well” exclusively, but there are thousands of fans of most teams in every major city.

The reasons for Queens are simple. There is ample space, public transit is in place, parking is no problem. One only has to drive 90 minutes down the NJ Turnpike to see a complex that works in Philadelphia. Side by side baseball and football stadiums maximize the space and just makes sense.

In addition to all of this, the area surrounding Citi Field is under significant change. In fact, it is really one of last opportunities for significant development in the five boroughs.

Imagine a hybrid of Patriots Place in Foxboro or the stadium district in San Francisco, retail and housing development spurred by stadium development.

Given the investment in the Atlantic Health training center as the home of the Jets, would a stadium move to Queens require the Jets relocate yet again. Simply put, no. NFL teams stay in hotels before every game, home and away. Finding a creative way to get the team from NJ to Queens (Probably less than 30 miles as the crow flies) quickly, be it bus, ferry, or train should be doable.

The only real question is Jets ownership. Do they want to take this leap? While it has some inherent risk and a lot of moving parts, I think it is ultimately a risk where the upside far outweighs the downside.

On the business side, it adds enterprise value to the business. It creates new revenue opportunities for the Jets. It potentially wipes the stink of the PSL disaster away from the fan base.

On the fan side, it creates the opportunity for a better, more compelling game environment. The stadium could have some signature elements, and create a true home field advantage.

Finally, it solves the identity void that this organization has been looking to fill since Namath wagged his finger in Miami. Woody and Christopher, this is the opportunity.


https://medium.com/@Ihernowitz/there-is-no-franchise-in-sports-like-the-new-york-jets-6bbf999529c0

 

 

not happening. But fun read.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Maxman said:

So you are also asking for a VIP lane off of the turnpike or route 3 I guess.

You are going to an event with 80,000 people. When you get there kind of early, you are late.  The tailgating lot wouldn't help if you are stuck on route 3.

Also there are like 4 people in total that want this. So, good luck.  :)

FDR had a secret track getting off at Grand Central. 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jetworks said:

Hopefully Metlife will be in the rear-view mirror in a few years.  I know it's an old article, but it makes a lot of sense, way more than Metlife did.

2026 New Jets Stadium
Ira Hernowitz

Jan 12, 2020·


There is no franchise in sports like the New York Jets. Uniquely, they have NEVER had their own stadium, which is unprecedented in major US sports history (now that the Raiders are moving to Las Vegas). From sharing Shea to renting at Giants Stadium to their current 50/50 split of MetLife Stadium, this is the start of an identity crisis this franchise has faced outside of Joe Namath and their Super Bowl III upset win (when almost every football team shared a baseball stadium).

MetLife is by far the best situation the organization has been in, but it is in no way the BEST possible solution for the team. In fact, only eleven years after opening, the time is right now for the Jets to begin the process of moving forward to build their own stadium, in New York City, to begin play in 2026.

The problems with MetLife are not surprising since you had to accommodate the requirements of two teams with competing visions for what a great stadium should be. The simple requirements of compromise created a generic stadium, built more for functionality than ambiance. However, the environment is only part of the problem.

First and foremost, it is too big. With over 82,000 seats, it will be the largest NFL stadium once the LA Coliseum is retired when the Rams move in 2020. While capacity was important in 1976, the fact is that times have changed dramatically. Quality of seating is important, as is scarcity, given that the real value of a ticket is now measured in the secondary market. MetLife has about 55,000 quality seats, and an upper bowl with thousands of low value seats. They have poor sight lines, are far from the field, and it is really the only stadium built in the last 20 years for football that built these upper level end zone seats.

This situation was part of the Giants compromise. The Giants wanted to replicate the bowl configuration of Giants Stadium, and they also wanted more seats to satisfy the long waiting list they had. The Jets on the other hand designed the West Side Stadium with fewer seats and no upper end zone seats.

In reality, even the West Side Stadium at 75,000 proposed seats was too large. 60,000 to 65,000 seats would in reality produce more revenue than the 82,000 seats they have now. Considering the aftermarket (which teams get a cut of) and the increased scarcity by reducing capacity, on top of making all the available seats better would have a positive effect on revenue.

A second issue is the coaches club section. While the idea and revenue associated with super premium seats makes sense, MetLife and Yankee Stadium have the same problem…the most visible seats on television are often empty. If the fans are eating at the buffet, staying out of the cold, or the seats are unsold, it is a visible eyesore that has to be an embarrassment to Jets management every week.

Beyond these issues, the stadium offers little in the way of “cool”. While this is subjective, it is simply a pretty generic stadium. There is no signature element of the stadium to identify with, which again is part of the compromise.

Finally, to build a stadium without a retractable roof in the Northeast is beyond comprehension. Forget fan comfort, the revenue opportunities of a retractable roof stadium in the New York market are almost reason alone to build it. Super Bowls, bowl games, 365 days of concerts and events…this is a no brainer. The West Side proposal was a retractable roof, which at the time was estimated to cost $200-$300 million, and was being picked up by the city. Of course, this was part of why Jim Dolan was so opposed to the stadium, he knew how much business it could take from MSG.

The facts are clear…a generic stadium, with lots of low value seats, with no roof and little ambiance should be a no brainer to replace. It appears the Jets knew this as the lease has some interesting out clauses starting in 2025, a mere 16 years after opening.

So the lease has an out, and the stadium issues are well documented. The big question is can it be done?

The first issue in building a new stadium is financial. There is no question a new retractable roof dome stadium in NY starts at $2bn and probably gets closer to $3bn.

Considering the Jets had to finance their share of MetLife (about $540 million per Forbes), and they have taken a bath on PSL’s, that’s a lot of debt to take on. A deeper look however suggests it is very doable.

First, let’s start with overall value of the business. Forbes currently estimates the value of the Jets at $3.2bn. So in the 20 years of owning the team, the Johnson’s parlayed a $635m investment and have realized a 5x return. That valuation is based on owning 50% of MetLife, so it would not be unreasonable to estimate their valuation with 100% ownership of a retractable roof stadium in NYC would increase by at least $1bn, so conservatively the team would be worth $4.2bn.

On the debit side of the equation is the debt on MetLife. If the Jets offered the Giants the opportunity to own 100% of MetLife in exchange for the remaining debt the Jets have, I imagine they would jump at it. If they didn’t, the Jets could sell their share of the stadium LLC, which I am sure would motivate the Giants to snap it up.

In this scenario, you have a business worth $4.2bn with only the debt remaining on the financing of the original purchase (which really shouldn’t be more than $100m unless the Jets have tapped into the equity). Not to play CFO, but finding financing in this scenario should be pretty simple. If you consider that the debt on MetLife was upgraded because of the consistency of the revenue, a new Jets stadium would have banks lining up to lend the money.

So now that there is a path to finance a stadium, where do you build it? While the West Side project had some upside, the location was never ideal. Public transportation was poor (solved since by the 7 train extension), and parking was impossible, making tailgating obsolete.

The easiest answer is in Queens, adjacent to Citi Field. I know most people like to talk about the Jets being a Queens/LI fan base, but I don’t buy that. The team has been in NJ longer than they were in Queens, and no sport is as regional as the NFL. Winning makes for fans, just look at how teams like the Steelers, Cowboys, and Patriots pack fans into opposing stadiums. It’s not that the fans “travel well” exclusively, but there are thousands of fans of most teams in every major city.

The reasons for Queens are simple. There is ample space, public transit is in place, parking is no problem. One only has to drive 90 minutes down the NJ Turnpike to see a complex that works in Philadelphia. Side by side baseball and football stadiums maximize the space and just makes sense.

In addition to all of this, the area surrounding Citi Field is under significant change. In fact, it is really one of last opportunities for significant development in the five boroughs.

Imagine a hybrid of Patriots Place in Foxboro or the stadium district in San Francisco, retail and housing development spurred by stadium development.

Given the investment in the Atlantic Health training center as the home of the Jets, would a stadium move to Queens require the Jets relocate yet again. Simply put, no. NFL teams stay in hotels before every game, home and away. Finding a creative way to get the team from NJ to Queens (Probably less than 30 miles as the crow flies) quickly, be it bus, ferry, or train should be doable.

The only real question is Jets ownership. Do they want to take this leap? While it has some inherent risk and a lot of moving parts, I think it is ultimately a risk where the upside far outweighs the downside.

On the business side, it adds enterprise value to the business. It creates new revenue opportunities for the Jets. It potentially wipes the stink of the PSL disaster away from the fan base.

On the fan side, it creates the opportunity for a better, more compelling game environment. The stadium could have some signature elements, and create a true home field advantage.

Finally, it solves the identity void that this organization has been looking to fill since Namath wagged his finger in Miami. Woody and Christopher, this is the opportunity.


https://medium.com/@Ihernowitz/there-is-no-franchise-in-sports-like-the-new-york-jets-6bbf999529c0

 

 

Queens!! No way. A huge portion of the fan base is in New Jersey now (many who have fled north jersey for south jersey or even other states like PA and DE). No one has time to travel to Queens lol. 

That said I know our fan contingent in Queens and LI love it. Reality though, the Johnsons aren't moving this team to Queens when they have prime location right off the 95 corridor and quick hop to Manhattan. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, SAR I said:

The article makes no sense.

If the Jets moved to Queens, myself and 80% ofthe fans from New Jersey would give up our season tickets immediately.  And Long Island is so much more crowded now than it was in 1983 that very few fans from that region would buy them either.

A dome would do nothing except remove our biggest homefield advantage-  the playoff cold and wind.  The Jets have won exactly 4 home playoff games in our history.  3 of them were against teams used to comfy warm conditions.

Jets fans are cheap and they don't show up even when tickets are less than $25 on a beautiful sunny day against an interesting opponent.  Without the Giants to cover half the expenses/losses and with fewer seats and a pricey dome, ticket prices will go up significantly.  The Jets haven't raised ticket prices in 14 years.  Jets fans talk a lot about what they want but they are unwilling to pay for it.

Lastly, the Jets are #2 in the entire NFL in attendance.  Proof-positive that how 'pretty' a stadium is doesn't mean anything to anyone.  Just look at the Mets with their gorgeous recreation of Ebbets Field.  They've been in Queens forever, many Mets fans are Jets fans, and they don't show up and they don't pay either.  The Jets aren't moving because there is no problem here, at least not a problem that Jets fans would pay more for.

SAR I

Just wanted to quote this post to say that I agree with Sar for once.  :)

The Jets aren't opting out. It isn't even a consideration.

  • Upvote 1
  • Post of the Week 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, SAR I said:

The article makes no sense.

If the Jets moved to Queens, myself and 80% ofthe fans from New Jersey would give up our season tickets immediately.  And Long Island is so much more crowded now than it was in 1983 that very few fans from that region would buy them either.

A dome would do nothing except remove our biggest homefield advantage-  the playoff cold and wind.  The Jets have won exactly 4 home playoff games in our history.  3 of them were against teams used to comfy warm conditions.

Jets fans are cheap and they don't show up even when tickets are less than $25 on a beautiful sunny day against an interesting opponent.  Without the Giants to cover half the expenses/losses and with fewer seats and a pricey dome, ticket prices will go up significantly.  The Jets haven't raised ticket prices in 14 years.  Jets fans talk a lot about what they want but they are unwilling to pay for it.

Lastly, the Jets are #2 in the entire NFL in attendance.  Proof-positive that how 'pretty' a stadium is doesn't mean anything to anyone.  Just look at the Mets with their gorgeous recreation of Ebbets Field.  They've been in Queens forever, many Mets fans are Jets fans, and they don't show up and they don't pay either.  The Jets aren't moving because there is no problem here, at least not a problem that Jets fans would pay more for.

SAR I

They would draw fans anywhere so if the NJ fans didn't want to drive across multiple bridges that would be made up for by NYC, LI and Westchester fans.

We've had 7 home playoff games in our history going only 4-3 in those games so while I don't disagree about a dome I disagree with your reasoning against a dome.

Jet fans aren't cheap, Jet fans are sick of losing and don't want to get ripped off.  The giants fans are the same way.  Because of adult PSLs both teams lost longtime season ticket holders and both have seen a huge increase in opposing fans in the stadium.

While I'm not a Met fan they show up when they win like all NY teams outside of the Knicks and Rangers who show up regardless because of the location of the building.  Had we been able to build the WSS that could have changed for us too.

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

They would draw fans anywhere so if the NJ fans didn't want to drive across multiple bridges that would be made up for by NYC, LI and Westchester fans.

Season tickets are a bigtime commitment, it's a 30-50 year grind.  Back in the 90's they were all the rage but these days with HDTV and Stubhub I just don't see the passion from the 20 and 30 year old's that would be mandatory in your scenario.  The Jets, and all NFL teams, need to hold onto their season ticket holders for dear life.  Anything they would do now to upset the 45 to 65 year old crowd would make NFL games an a-la-carte affair, very few season ticket holders.  Times have changed.  Moving to Queens would be season ticket suicide.

1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

We've had 7 home playoff games in our history going only 4-3 in those games so while I don't disagree about a dome I disagree with your reasoning against a dome.

We are 3-0 all time against warm weather teams in home playoff games (Raiders, Jaguars, Colts).

We are 1-3 all time against cold weather teams in home playoff games (Chiefs, Bills, Patriots, Chiefs).

1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

Jet fans aren't cheap, Jet fans are sick of losing and don't want to get ripped off.  The giants fans are the same way. 

Having been a season ticket holder needing to sell tickets on occasion through the years where we were perennial playoff contenders ('98 thru '08) and the years where we Super Bowl contenders ('09 thru '11) I can tell you that Jets fans are always cheap.  Even when we were an elite AFC team, getting fans to pay even face value was a challenge.

1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

Because of adult PSLs both teams lost longtime season ticket holders and both have seen a huge increase in opposing fans in the stadium.

It has nothing to do with the age of the fans or the PSL's.  Opposing fans are a way of life now in every sport.  The economy has been great, air travel has been cheap, and attending away games is a lot of fun.  There are more enemy fans in Seattle and New England than there are enemy fans in New Jersey.  They have smaller stadiums.  We have more fans.  It's got nothing to do with the Jets.

1 hour ago, nyjunc said:

Had we been able to build the WSS that could have changed for us too.

WSS was going to have 20,000 less seats and no parking.  That means there would have been more corporate fans there, more enemy fans there, and ticket prices dramatically higher than we have in MetLife.  We are far better off where we are.  Big stadium, lots of parking, tons of tailgating, convenient trains, an abundance of tickets at low aftermarket prices.

SAR I

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

They would draw fans anywhere so if the NJ fans didn't want to drive across multiple bridges that would be made up for by NYC, LI and Westchester fans.

We've had 7 home playoff games in our history going only 4-3 in those games so while I don't disagree about a dome I disagree with your reasoning against a dome.

Jet fans aren't cheap, Jet fans are sick of losing and don't want to get ripped off.  The giants fans are the same way.  Because of adult PSLs both teams lost longtime season ticket holders and both have seen a huge increase in opposing fans in the stadium.

While I'm not a Met fan they show up when they win like all NY teams outside of the Knicks and Rangers who show up regardless because of the location of the building.  Had we been able to build the WSS that could have changed for us too.

Everyone is moving out of NY City.  They aren't moving the stadium.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SAR I said:

Season tickets are a bigtime commitment, it's a 30-50 year grind.  Back in the 90's they were all the rage but these days with HDTV and Stubhub I just don't see the passion from the 20 and 30 year old's that would be mandatory in your scenario.  The Jets, and all NFL teams, need to hold onto their season ticket holders for dear life.  Anything they would do now to upset the 45 to 65 year old crowd would make NFL games an a-la-carte affair, very few season ticket holders.  Times have changed.  Moving to Queens would be season ticket suicide.

We are 3-0 all time against warm weather teams in home playoff games (Raiders, Jaguars, Colts).

We are 1-3 all time against cold weather teams in home playoff games (Chiefs, Bills, Patriots, Chiefs).

Having been a season ticket holder needing to sell tickets on occasion through the years where we were perennial playoff contenders ('98 thru '08) and the years where we Super Bowl contenders ('09 thru '11) I can tell you that Jets fans are always cheap.  Even when we were an elite AFC team, getting fans to pay even face value was a challenge.

It has nothing to do with the age of the fans or the PSL's.  Opposing fans are a way of life now in every sport.  The economy has been great, air travel has been cheap, and attending away games is a lot of fun.  There are more enemy fans in Seattle and New England than there are enemy fans in New Jersey.  They have smaller stadiums.  We have more fans.  It's got nothing to do with the Jets.

WSS was going to have 20,000 less seats and no parking.  That means there would have been more corporate fans there, more enemy fans there, and ticket prices dramatically higher than we have in MetLife.  We are far better off where we are.  Big stadium, lots of parking, tons of tailgating, convenient trains, an abundance of tickets at low aftermarket prices.

SAR I

I don't think weather played a role in any of those playoff wins other than the colts game in my 02 and the jets lost in the mud to a cold weather bills team in 81 then a web weather dolphin team in 82 on the road.

 

I don't know if it's being cheap or people thinking you are a friend and should give them to them.  I rarely had extras but when I did I never asked for money for them.

 

I agree with that about opposing fans being a way of life now.  I think that has to do with tickets being easy to buy on the internet.

The worst part of games for me is getting in and out. I would love to have taken a train to the games.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Maxman said:

Everyone is moving out of NY City.  They aren't moving the stadium.

I didn't say to move it now but if they got that stadium 15 years ago like they tried I think it would have worked out well.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SAR I said:

Having been a season ticket holder needing to sell tickets on occasion through the years where we were perennial playoff contenders ('98 thru '08) and the years where we Super Bowl contenders ('09 thru '11) I can tell you that Jets fans are always cheap.  Even when we were an elite AFC team, getting fans to pay even face value was a challenge.

It's called supply and demand.  The demand for Jets tickets is not there. I go to 1 Giants game a year and every year the tickets are thru the roof even when they are terrible. When the jets are terrible the tickets are practically free. 

 

Economics 101

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, nyjunc said:

I didn't say to move it now but if they got that stadium 15 years ago like they tried I think it would have worked out well.  

I think Woody believes the same exact thing. He wanted NY in the worst way.  NY didn't want the Jets.  

So the home is the home and that isn't going to change. There are people thinking the Jets are going to opt out. That ship has definitely sailed.

  • Upvote 2
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/9/2021 at 9:28 PM, Maxman said:

So you are also asking for a VIP lane off of the turnpike or route 3 I guess.

You are going to an event with 80,000 people. When you get there kind of early, you are late.  The tailgating lot wouldn't help if you are stuck on route 3.

Also there are like 4 people in total that want this. So, good luck.  :)

I might support SAR's idea.  Tailgate lot for 28,000 cars.  A non-tailgate lot for SAR and 12 others. 😛

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2021 at 6:13 AM, SAR I said:

A dome would do nothing except remove our biggest homefield advantage-  the playoff cold and wind.  The Jets have won exactly 4 home playoff games in our history.  3 of them were against teams used to comfy warm conditions.

 

Episode 5 What GIF by The Office

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you tailgate in lot B do you have to talk thru the tunnel or do you have direct access to the Bud light gate? I

 

My tickets are by the bud light entrance this year.  Was thinking  lot M or lot B are the best option. Anyone know if you have easy access to rt 3 from these lots as I'm heading to 80 west.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2021 at 9:02 PM, Maxman said:

Just wanted to quote this post to say that I agree with Sar for once.  :)

The Jets aren't opting out. It isn't even a consideration.

Don't make a habit of it, Buddy. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, JETSY14 said:

If you tailgate in lot B do you have to talk thru the tunnel or do you have direct access to the Bud light gate? I

 

My tickets are by the bud light entrance this year.  Was thinking  lot M or lot B are the best option. Anyone know if you have easy access to rt 3 from these lots as I'm heading to 80 west.

I think the Bud Light gate is a loading dock and isn’t even used.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lot K Tailgaters said:

Just wondering if anyone else dropped their season tickets this year.  I still have mine but it seems like a lot of my tailgate crew and people around me are dropping out this season.  

First year getting season tickets as I usually buy a couple games off eBay or stubhub.  I only wanted to be in 4 sections and only wanted the 1st or 2nd row of the section. Every section had what I requested. Just going off of that there must be a ton of tickets available.  To be honest if I waited until after the schedule release I would not of bought season tickets as I don't like the dates of the games. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/15/2021 at 11:56 PM, Lot K Tailgaters said:

Just wondering if anyone else dropped their season tickets this year.  I still have mine but it seems like a lot of my tailgate crew and people around me are dropping out this season.  

My bother actually bought one. Did they say why 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/10/2021 at 12:13 AM, SAR I said:

It's more than a long walk.  If you arrive at the stadium 60 minutes before kickoff the traffic backs up half a mile on Rt. 3, not only will you stress for 45 minutes just to find a spot in a lot, after you get directed to the outer edges of Pegasus you then have to sprint to get to your seat before kickoff.  And this year with no middle tier that keeps non-season ticket holders packed in to the parking deck thus spilling out into the main lots, it's going to be so much worse.

I propose that 1/3 of the lots in the stadium, the ones behind and in front of Pegasus, be deemed "tailgate only" lots with their own specific entrance.  Plenty of space for everyone into that sort of thing.  RV's, pickup trucks, vans, school buses, cars, have at it.  Open it at 8AM.  What a party!  Nothing but tailgaters.  Foul language encouraged.  The uglier the attire the better.  Take up as many spots as you'd like.  Throw your footballs, smash some windshields.  Piss on all the Fords and Chevys.  Leave your trash on the ground to feed the gulls.  No attitude from others.  No snide looks.  Just outdoor sports bar heaven.

Then leave 2/3 of the lots as "no tailgating" lots, open them at 11AM, no special vehicles, just the typical sedans and SUV's, one spot per car strictly enforced.  Then people like me who find the game itself the primary attraction can glide on in at Noon and have a comfortable amount of time to walk to our seats.

Doing it this way makes everyone happy.  Tailgaters are left alone and have a massive party.  Regular fans are left alone and don't have to get to the stadium 3 hours early because a handful are causing a parking and traffic nightmare.

SAR I

Holy Crap !!!!! SAR I has a good idea .

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.




×
×
  • Create New...